Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 15:12:25 10/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2003 at 01:01:33, Nicholas Cooper wrote: >Although I agree that computers will eventually overwhelm humanity at playing >chess, I would like to take exception to the statement "top players now need to >work hard to maintain an even position with the top programs". If you look at >the first half of the Kramnik-Fritz and Kasparov-Junior matches, the computers >were the ones struggling to maintain the balance. In the second half of both >matches, I believe that various non-chess factors such as fatigue, fear of >failure etc. decreased the humans quality of play, allowing the computers to >draw the match. > >So in my humble opinion, it's not at all apparent that we have reached the >"cross over" point... at least not as yet... > >Just my 2c worth. > >Nick Cooper I agree. The computers' RESULTS are great, but part of that is due to the extraneous factors you mentioned. I think the overall RESULTS of computers in contest with GMs have swung in favor of computers, but I still think the GMs play better chess when they can avoid the fatigue, distraction, etc. issues. But since ratings are a measure of overall RESULTS, not understanding of chess or strength-when-not-blundering, I think the computers' ratings have now approximately equalled those of the top humans. I suspect the two will stay approximately even for a few more years as comptuers get faster and "smarter" but top GMs get more practice and savvy against computers. It does seem that eventually computers will dominate, but I don't think we'll live to see a day when no human can ever win a game against the top computers.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.