Author: Timothy J. Frohlick
Date: 10:38:38 01/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
Ted, You are correct Sir. The silicon-based GM rating is not official because of imperfections in the knowledge base of the computers. Computers and computer programs,as you know, are fallible and need human input to be used as effective analysis tools. The chess computer ratings will get more solidly grandmaster level. It might take another twenty to fifty years but who is in a hurry? Tim Frohlick On January 05, 2004 at 08:51:39, Ted Summers wrote: >If a program, any program (like X3D Fritz) plays some positions like a 2700+ >player and other positions like a 1600 or 1700 player what would you say it's >true rating should be? I am asking because of the 3rd game of the Kasparov vs. >X3D Fritz match. In human games I don't think that their is such a huge gap in >how a human would play a open position verus how they would play a closed >position in terms of chess strength for example. However in computer chess this >seems to be very normal. So I don't see how we can say that a program is 2700+ >when it plays some positions and as such weak player in other positions. Granted >in tactics they are a GrandMaster, however in strategy they are maybe a grade A >(1900) player. These are my thoughts, interested in hearing yours. > >Thanks >Ted Summers
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.