Author: Steven Schwartz
Date: 09:50:06 11/11/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 1998 at 12:40:37, Don Dailey wrote: >On November 10, 1998 at 14:50:07, Reynolds Takata wrote: > >>Is I.M. Kaufman, and the recent CCC poll on Comp strength the definitive word on >>whether comps are GM strength? I was just wondering because it AMAZES me that >>after so much debate on the subject that an International Chess Master states in >>"Computer Chess Web Reports" that he believes that a program "Mchess 8.1" would >>be able to acquire the 3 grandmaster norms in 40/2 tournaments to acquire the GM >>title, and that almost no one in the group commented on it. It's stunning this >>silence, especially since most CCC members will probably expect other programs >>(i.e. Rebel10, Fritz, Hiarcs etc.) to be stronger than Mchess. Of course I know >>it's not definitive but does this mean that the tide is turning hard against the >>ney sayers? Yes i know you might be able to find some other titled players to >>counter, though I don't know if they know as much about comp chess as Kaufman. >>Also every time i have asked titled players (5 players) on ICC if Comps could >>get the norms at 40/2 they all said yes. Though some didn't think comps could >>stand up to a lot of GM's in a match but they thought a tournament situation was >>different. Though after watching R10 draw anand in a 40/2 game i'm not certain >>even of that. >> >>Reynolds Takata >>USCF Life Master >>Fide Master >> >> >> >>"The last time I checked, the indicated adjustment to convert to USCF >>ratings was 180, which would give it a predicted USCF rating of 2696. Even a >>tiny gain would bring the new version over >>2700, the same level as the top four or five American grandmasters. This is at >>standard tournament speed (40/2); at fast >>chess the programs are stronger still. Although I suspect that the method used >>to get the Swedish ratings tends to exaggerate >>the ratings of the top programs a bit for several reasons, >> >>I do believe that MChess Pro 8.0 would be able to earn the >>Grandmaster title if given a reasonable number of opportunities to play in GM >>norm tournaments. >> >> >>In fact, an earlier version >>(5.0) defeated three Grandmasters in a single six round event (Aegon) at >>standard time controls. At fast chess, it is a terror;" (Kaufman Nov, 1998) > >Is Larry Kaufman the definitive word on whether computers are >Grandmaster strength yet? YES, almost. You don't know this guy >the way I do. Although everyone is fallible, I would have a hard >time pointing to a more reliable source than this to answer this >question. Larry knows computer chess like the back of his hand. >He knows the problems and weaknesses but he also is a strong >player although he is not a Grandmaster. His opinion on this will >be better than almost any grandmaster opinion. Why do I make this >ludicrous statement? Because it doesn't have as much to do with >strength as it does to objectivity and rational thinking. Larry >is king in this regard and knows ALL the facts and is not prone >to making hasty or biased judgements. I don't think he has a >biased bone in his body! He is simply a clear rational thinker >and is ultimately qualified to evaluate chess programs. > >So if Larry said this, I wouldn't bet against it, unless you just >want to throw your money away, in which case you can just send it >to me and save yourself the hassle! >- Don I have known Larry for over 15 years, and Don, you are right on the button! Well said. - Steve (ICD/Your Move)
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.