Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 16:20:55 02/06/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2004 at 18:27:36, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On February 06, 2004 at 18:10:05, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 06, 2004 at 17:57:48, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On February 06, 2004 at 17:35:31, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On February 06, 2004 at 17:24:35, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>I believe that the first top commercial program that support FRC and win a match >>>>>against Peter Svidler will be a big seler. What do you think? >>>> >>>>Who's going to buy it? >>>> >>>>Nobody plays FRC except for a few extrememly rare chess geeks. >>>> >>>>Ask 100 people on the street: "What is Fischer Random Chess?" >>>> >>>>If a single person of the 100 knows the answer, I would be astonished. >>> >>>I happen to be in a chess club when I wrote this and just asked 30 players and >>>24 answered correctly. >> >>Did you take them out to the street first? ;-) >> >>Maybe the interest is greater than I think. Chess variants in general are >>uninteresting to me, but a lot of people here seem to like them. >> >>It's probably because I have enough trouble with the original game and don't >>want to waste my time learning all the variants for me. >> >>Perhaps others are more up to the challenge. > > >I also asked the same 30 people if they would buy Commercial programs that >support FRC, 13 answered that if it was in addition to the standard >chess program like Fritz 9 plus FRC or Shredder9 plus FRC they would buy it. But >9 answered that they have problem beating amateur programs and to spend money on >a program that is much stronger than they are (Like Fritz 8 or the latest >version of Shredder 8 is for GM and IM. Only a few of them (8) answered that >they already have a hard time memorizing most of the openings for standard chess >and because of that FRC will become more popular in the future. > >Pichard That was a very small sample and the survey was unscientific but the comments received were very interesting anyway. It is a sad but widespread misconception that chess-playing programs are only for playing against. That is, in fact, not their main usefulness. All serious chessplayers should do post-mortem analyses of their serious games and the top chess-playing programs are very useful for that purpose. Refusing to purchase a strong chess-playing program because it's too strong is illogical if the program is to be used to assist post-mortem analysis. Having said that, I must express my hope that the amateur and professional creators of chess-playing programs will soon rise to the challenge of making truly realistic human-like programs which can play at all levels. The use of different personalities is a good idea but ideally they would be HUMAN personalities. Preparation for a [human vs human] Class Tournament using a GOOD chess-playing program is a thing for the future but not currently available. It would be easy enough to randomize the choices of personalities [and strengths] to simulate a real human chess tournament. It's a pity when chessplayers choose not to play against a chess-playing program because it's too strong. That is a problem which can be solved. Bob D.
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.