Author: Duncan Roberts
Date: 16:05:10 10/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
who would you nominate as world's biggest anti-computer chess expert. ? duncan On October 11, 2004 at 19:03:05, Albert Silver wrote: >On October 11, 2004 at 15:49:07, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>I have Chrilly's permission to post these remarks he emailed me about Hydra: >> >>"Winning against GMs has to a certain extent already lost its charm. We are >>already in the position were we can only lose. I personally think that this >>expectation overestimates the capabilities of the program. But it is a matter of >>fact that this version played 8 games against top GMs, won 6 and made 2 draws. >>Gives an Elo-rating of >2900." >> >>"Leonxto (Leontxo García, well known chess journalist from Spain) wrote in El >>Pais: "y ademas muestra uns unaudita "comprension" de la estrategia" (and it >>also shows an unheard of "understanding" of the strategy). Actually it has no >>idea at all about this. It has some simple rules like "It is beneficial to >>attack the area around the opponent king, to attack opponent pieces, to control >>the center. It knows a little bit what abut bad/good bishops, when is the knight >>stronger than the bishop". The big surprise for me was, that even this simple >>rules were sufficient to know that the exchange of the light-squared bishop of >>Ponomariov in the first match was not the best idea. The evaluation went up a >>1/4 of a pawn. Generally I saw no GM move which had some flavour of geniality (I >>am speaking only of the Hydra-games). The moves which really surprised me (e.g. >>Qe2 after Nc4 in the last match) were done by Hydra." > >Thanks for sharing. As to the remarks on its knowledge, I must say I'm not >terribly surprised. Similar remarks have been noted on Fritz when it was a far >more 'ignorant' program. The depth of the search allows it to see the >consequences of its moves sufficiently to compensate for a lack of knowledge, >and my oh my is Hydra going deeply. Even Ed Schroeder has noted this on Rebel, >and the latest versions have the knowledge parameter at a mere 100 when the >maximum goes all the way to 500. Much as it would be nice to use all the things >it potentially knows, it just hasn't proved useful enough to compensate for the >fewer plies. Still, it would be interesting to see how a real expert in >anti-computer chess fared against it. Much as I respect the GMs who played, I >hardly consider Ponomariov or Karjakin as expert computer opponents, which makes >their suitability for this particular event questionable. > > Albert
This page took 0.01 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.