Author: Peter Berger
Date: 14:37:26 09/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 14, 2004 at 16:50:25, martin fierz wrote: >On September 14, 2004 at 16:45:02, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On September 14, 2004 at 14:58:42, Evgeny Shu wrote: >> >>>I wonder where is the interest if computer analysing the game and not the human >>>? :) >> >>Without wishing to criticize, I ask myself the exact same thing. I'm not going >>to enter the whole "is it cheating?" debate, since that's not even the issue. >>Still, what fun can it be to sit there feeding a computer's moves, no matter how >>well you administered the time and engines used? I guess the bottom line is what >>is more important to you: the results or the actual playing? >> >> Albert > >i know a swiss correspondence player who has some title (i forget what, corr-IM >i think) who pays an over-the-board IM to help him decide on moves. bottom line: >there are always people interested in results, and the recognition they can get >from these results, because only few people realize that they cheated. > >cheers > martin I talked to an OTB GM some time ago, close to 2600, who was competing in a CC championship in an anonymous way ( also using computers of course) as "helper" for a player who had hired him, because he had tried to reach some result for several years, but had never managed to do it on his own. The master had a unique approach to computerchess, that was of course interesting to get to know, but I kept wondering about the guy who had hired him, the wannabe master. I can't imagine correspondence chess to still work at the higher levels once computers have improved to a level above any human skills. People will just hire their computers. Peter
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.