Author: Mig Greengard
Date: 06:34:35 11/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 25, 2003 at 07:58:40, Frank Phillips wrote: >I do not follow the logic. > >Humans beat each other at chess because of better memory and preparation, plus >skill and other attributes of course – stamina, nerves...... > >The significant word seems to be competition. One skill set versus another. > >When computers were no threat to professional players, none of this seemed to be >an issue. Is it important now because of the threat of the top humans losing? >They certainly appear scared; and if GK is anything to go by would rather go out >with a wimper, or is that several $M ...... The logic is human intereference by way of the opening book becoming more important than the ability of the engine to play competent chess. And my question was about machine-machine. With man-machine it's obvious. A Grandmaster-trained book of millions of moves has nothing to do with man vs machine at all. It's man's analysts against the machine's analyts. Unplugging the engine for 20 moves is silly. Obviously the problem would be brought up as it escalated to ridiculous levels, but questioning the validity of opening books has been around since they have.
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.