Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:03:46 01/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2004 at 14:40:48, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On January 27, 2004 at 16:52:59, Mike S. wrote: > >>On January 27, 2004 at 03:07:02, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >> >>>a) an intelligent engine, which could navigate itself through any opening phase >> >>The Rogozenko match has shown that nowadays engines (even if not especially >>adapted for FRC or Shuffle) are most probably stronger than a "normal" GM at >>this. Rogozenko lost that match against Tiger 15, even although he was allowed >>to use a computer for tactical assistance! > >GM Rogozenko might not be able to win against computers in FRC with tactical >assistance. > >You conclude from one match (specific player vs. specific program) that >a normal GM is "most probably" weaker. >The same person would cry out loud if someone would draw the conclusion from one >short match Ruffian 2-Shredder 8 that ended clearly in favour of Ruffian 2: > >Ruffian 2 is most probably stronger than Shredder 8. > >> >>You always argue like engines would be complete unable to play openings >>themselves. This is just plain wrong and provides false information for new >>computerchess fans. It's just that the level of play may be somewhat lower >>*sometimes* (in a minority of cases IMO), maybe 2300 instead of 2600 in extreme >>cases, i.e. in difficult long range gambits. Man needed *decades* of opening >>theory and practise to explore such gambits. Often, much of the old analysis is >>wrong, refutations are found again and again. So why expect from chess engines, >>that they find all this correctly in 3 minutes?? :-)) >> >>In general, engines will be better than IMs and GMs anyway, when "normal" >>(normal for computers means very deep) tactical things have to be calculated in >>the opening. Im not talking about Kasparov, but "normal" GMs. Most engines know >>the common opening principles quite well (different quality of engines >>undisputed). > >Man, you have obviously no clue about what you are talking here. >Two of the three best programs according to SSDF (Fritz and Junior) know nothing >about common opening principles. >Junior moves its Qeen around in the opening like someone who hasn't learned yet >how to move with knights and bishops and Deep Fritz plays sometimes even worse: > >http://talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?345123 Are you sure that Deep fritz8 played the moves? I do not have Deep Fritz8 but I suspect that the person who run it did an error and used a weak personality of Deep Fritz8. No chess program should play the stupid moves in the strongest setting unless it has serious bugs. Uri
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.