Author: Tony Nichols
Date: 02:59:57 04/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2005 at 09:23:23, gerold daniels wrote: >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 > >good morning Tony.the top chess programs are under rated. not many people can >beat them. a draw is not a win.computer programs should use all that they are >designed for to beat any human or other programs.most gm,s will not play a >chess program in public because they know they can,t beat the program. they use >the top programs to remember the opening moves. anyone who does not know the >opening moves will lose. most games are lost because of a weak opening. >each year the free programs get a little better pushing the top comm.programs >to be better. on a scale of 1-100 the chess program is about on 2 now to what >it will be in 10 years or less. > >are you still testing programs. i haven,t seen any of your testing results >posted lately. > >good luck, > >gerold. Hi, Gerold I agree that programs will only get stronger and I am happy for it. I don't think we are at the point that computers are as strong as the top humans. I think that your argument rather proves my case about opening books. If the computers were stronger than humans we would be playing their theory. Not the other way around. I know that some novelties are attributed to computers. I think you will find that the majority of these novelties actually accur in the middlegame. Of course, In many variations opening theory has progressed even to the endgame. Regards Tony
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.