Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 01:46:40 04/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 03:39:06, Tony Nichols wrote: > I know I might make some people mad by what I say but someone should say it. >Today's chess programs are not nearly as strong as the top human players. All >this hype about Hydra being 3000 elo is a joke. In fact, All the elo claims for >computers are a joke. We have seen many examples of class players drawing >against these programs. These same players would have no chance of drawing even >an average GM(no disrespect). These high level man vs machine matches are just >promotional gimmicks. The top players won't play anti-computer chess for many >reasons: >1. ego. The players want to beat the computer with normal(manly) chess. They >also don't want their achievement to be devalued. >2. money. If you show the weaknesses of the program and systematically beat it >you certainly will not get invited to another match. >I find it strange that people who approach computer vs. computer tournaments in >a very scientific way are the same people who scoff at posts made by players who >regularly draw against the top programs. Perhaps this information upsets their >fantasy? I don't know. >I for one am an avid user of chess programs and I find them invaluable. However, >even I (1850 elo)have to guide the programs along the right paths during >analysis. Could you imagine me telling Kasparov that he's missing the point! No. >The programs perform as well as they do because they are very good at tactics >and most importantly they have huge opening books. I know this is a >controversial topic but if we really want to test the strenght of programs, then >have them play against strong humans without opening books. Many here would not >even consider it. >I am interested in what others have to say!? >Regards >Tony I basicly agree with you, there are positions beyond the comprehention of todays programs. If you can find a weakness and exploit it repeatedly then by all means do so, the prog deserves to lose the rating! :) But aside from this rather obvious fact, I think chess programmers care mostly about finding the "objectively" best move in any given position. This is part of the problem perhaps, because one of the basic assumptions in the search algortithm is that the opponent will always respond with the strongest possible move! When you play against weaker players this assumption is no longer entirely true! In fact you should often play a bit crazy just to avoid those drawishly even positions. Humans know that but I think most programs aren't designed that way. So while I agree that humans could do more to develop anti-computer strategies, programmers could also do more to develop anti-human strategies. :) It just seems no one really cares that much about these 2100 players trying again and again to draw by a blocked pawn position. Most programmers just don't see it as a big enough annoyance, having the engine play differently depending on the opponent is a in fact a much bigger annoyance. Anyway, there are certainly more interesting things to work on in a chess engine :) -S.
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.