Author: Peter Skinner
Date: 07:19:32 10/13/04
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2004 at 09:36:13, Graham Laight wrote: >On October 13, 2004 at 09:09:05, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>On October 13, 2004 at 07:51:42, Graham Laight wrote: >> >>>I refer you to http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?391364 , and I >>>would be interested to read your comments! >> >>One tournament would hardly be a basis to determine the strength of a human or a >>computer. > >This is a good point. However - the results I'm getting back from the simulator >(linked above) are seriously at odds with some assumptions that some members in >this thread seem to hold: > >1. That the computers at Bilbao had a roughly equal chance of winning. If you >create a high probability of winning (in order to justify Hydra and Fritz's >results), then you end up with a startlingly low probability of Junior getting >the low score that it did - EVEN WITH ONLY 4 GAMES. > >2. Joachim used a 50% probability of winning in his post to get acceptable >probabilities for the 3 different outcomes (3.5/4 x 2 and 1.5/4). However - this >is at odds with what Dr Hyatt wrote - which is that when contemplating computer >chess strength, I should "think lower" >(http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?391290) > >IMO, in terms of what members have been writing in this thread, these are VERY >SIGNIFICANT points. > >-g Well many including myself and Dr.Hyatt have been saying for years that computers are not stronger than humans. They might be equal to humans but not stronger. Computers still have the major flaw in long term planning, and positional management in a game. This is where the human GM excels, and crushes the computer opponent. If you talk to Amir, I am sure he is quite pleased with 3 draws and only 1 loss vs these GM's. I am just as sure that Robert would be happy with such a result. It is common thinking that computers are dominant in the game of chess, and the loss by Junior shows just how far computers have to come. Just as the games by Shredder on ICC at 120/0 show that it is hardly the ideal opponent for humans, yet is the strongest when it comes to playing computers. Any opinion of strength based on one result, or tournament is just that. An opinion. Opinions are just like assholes.. everyone has one. Peter
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.