Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 06:21:00 06/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2004 at 08:41:23, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On June 05, 2004 at 08:28:08, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On June 05, 2004 at 06:40:48, Tord Romstad wrote: >> >>>On June 04, 2004 at 18:39:13, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>Since computer can hold and remember more Opening than any Human and they are at >>>>the level of the very best human players such as Kasparov, Anand and Kramnik' >>>>the need for Fischer Random Chess will become more popular in the next 5 years. >>> >>>I don't see why the computer's perfect memory would contribute to the popularity >>>of FRC. Of course humans and computers have different skills. The computer is >>>obviously superior at remembering concrete and exact information, and at >>>calculating >>>quickly. The human is superior at pattern recognition and long-range planning. >>>There are some games where the computer's strengths are the more important >>>(like othello), some where the human's skills are more important (like go), and >>>some which are somewhere in between (like chess). Why does the fact that >>>computer >>>players are competitive in chess make the game less attractive for humans? >> >>I agree, programs are weaker when playing without book but so are humans. >> >>>And by the way, I don't think FRC is any more difficult to play for computers >>>than >>>classical chess. If some of the top programmers spent some time implementing >>>FRC, the top engines would be just as competitive there as in classical chess. >> >>I think so too. >>If the desire is to make a game where humans can still beat computers then FRC >>is not hard enough. >>That's not the idea with FRC however. >> >>>I personally find FRC to be one of the least interesting chess variants I have >>>ever >>>seen. If you want to abandon classical chess, why not switch to some of the >>>many more complicated chess variants which really add something new to the >>>game? >> >>With FRC you don't really want a new game, you want the old familiar chess game, >>only without the need to spend countless hours memorizing long opening lines to >>become a good player. >> >>FRC can be played the standard chess pieces and it takes very little getting >>used to. >>I have tried other variants and I find it really hard to adjust to new pieces >>and picture how they move. You just don't "see it" like you do with normal >>pieces, without that it's impossible to calculate tactics so you have to invest >>a lot of time and basicly start from scratch in a whole new game. >> >>>There are lots of such variants, including Chess with Different Armies, >>>shogi, hexagonal chess and Gothic chess. And unlike FRC, all of these chess >>>variants really *are* more difficult for computers than classical chess. >> >>FRC was never designed to be an anti-computer game :) >> >>>>Even a player such as former world champion Garry Kasparov who has incredible >>>>memorization capabilities, complained that he could not always remember his >>>>opening preparation. Therefore, it will become justifiable to match the very >>>>best human against the very vest FRC program. >>> >>>Neither Kasparov nor Kramnik would be very interested in such a match, I >>>think. Leko would probably be willing to play, though. >> >>They go where the money go, for them it's business. >> >>>>Probably very soon Shredder and Hiarcs will also be available in FRC. >>> >>>Why do you think so? There is currently no market demand for a professional >>>FRC engine. Right now, there are several hundred engines which play classical >>>chess, and less than ten which play FRC. >> >>It's a small hack to most engines, so a better questions is "why not do it?". >> >>>I happen to be one of the few engine >>>authors which have written engines for both games. Every week, I get about >>>50 e-mails from users with feedback about my classical chess engine. I get >>>almost no feedback at all about the FRC engine. Richard Pijl and Volker Anuss, >>>who have also written FRC engines, have been kind enough to play a few >>>games and send them to me, and you played a few games which you posted >>>here, but that's all I have received so far. It took more than a week after the >>>release of my FRC engine before anybody could even confirm that it worked >>>(I couldn't test it, because I don't run Windows). >>> >>>The truth is that there is almost zero interest in FRC. From a commercial >>>point of view, adding FRC support to Shredder or Hiarcs would be a complete >>>waste of time. >> >>Well so is adding SMP support, and unlike FRC that's not a small hack at all. >>:) > >>-S. >> >>>Tord > > And I would be happy to pay an additional $15 for a version of Shredder and >Hiarcs that support FRC:-) > >Jorge
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.