Author: Frank Phillips
Date: 08:17:33 11/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 25, 2003 at 09:34:35, Mig Greengard wrote: >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. Topical for your main point: [1] Kingway(IM) kibitzes: Shows exactly how a better opening book can matter Big Time. [1] Kingway(IM) kibitzes: Calculate all you want Brutus ... you're still Busted. Still the player has to be good enough to win.
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.