Author: Terry Presgrove
Date: 16:59:52 12/06/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 1998 at 19:08:41, Prakash Das wrote: >I don't know why you find it surprising that computers (in this case Crafty) >play strongly at blitz time controls. It's already known this is their playing >fields. Quoting the oft-quoted wrong example (in my view), this is like asking a >marathon runner to compete with a Ferrari. > > The real test of computers is long tournament time controls. Crafty is most >likely not the strongest. MCP, Hiarcs, Fritz, Rebel, CST, CM, Shredder, Nimzo >are all much stronger. > > It's interesting to watch a computer/human blitz game, but it's not valuable >data. > > By the way, there are crafties which play on FICS too. (to balance the mention >off icc in the post). And they are plenty tough also. There are human chessplayers very good at blitz and have held their own against top programs playing on ICC-" mentioning ICC is a stated fact not advertisement "(particularly at 5 3 0r 5 5 time controls). Heatstroke is run on a P233 relatively slow by todays standards. MY point is merely that todays crafty has come along way and is very competitive at blitz play and on faster hardware in my view is of IM strength at slower time controls. Blitz is a game of its own and must be viewed as a distinctive game within the broader game of chess. And Crafty has demonstrated over time its at or near the top under the gun of top notch competition in the arena of some of the best chess blitz players in the world. To say that a programs accomplishment in blitz (means nothing)"not valuable data" underminds the value and nature of the game of blitz chess! TP
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.