Author: Terry Giles
Date: 11:28:30 07/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 01, 2005 at 14:05:11, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On July 01, 2005 at 13:41:05, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>On July 01, 2005 at 09:18:09, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>Since my perfect chessmachine ROLF played only 75% of the HYDRA moves against >>>Adams, you can see how far away HYDRA is still from perfect play. That is why >>>it's still making sense if more GM play show events. >> >>It's a path near to perfect, perfection is a "chimera" , but it's stronger than >>strongest humans listening to Mr. Adams words...that is why it's so damn >>difficult to beat: >> >>From Adams interview at chessbase >>... >>"I think it proves that Hydra is a much stronger ‘player’ than any other >>computer in the world. We may not be able to measure its strength in Elo, but it >>is huge. I also suspect Hydra is stronger than any other human opponent. Okay, >>it has to be proved in the future, but this is my impression at the moment and I >>suspect it is accurate. I mean from my point of view I don’t think I played >>terribly. I did my best and it just wasn’t good enough." >> >> >>w.b.r. >>Otello > > >Hi Otello, > >what Adams says in the interview is under the medication of 10000 he got for his >draw. Adams doesn't know the computerchess world. Certainly he never heard of my >perfect chess machine. > >Debating the Elo of HYDRA doesn't make sense because it hasn't played much games >yet. On playchesscom HYDRA wasn't successful at all. Now you cannot begin to >calculate the Elo for - say - Sturday night or Monday. Elo is either for the >whole of it or nothing. > >If a human chessplayer had beaten Adams with 5,5 to 0,5 THEN this human >chessplayer had a tremendous Elo performance. But if you let Adams play a 6 >games showevent against HYDRA, a completely unknown machine, and then calculate >Elo number with human touch so to speak. There is no such number. > >My tiny little program ROLF has Elo of over 30000, because it won all the games >it played. No wonder because it plays perfect chess with its 640 processors! > >That should give you a light impression of the power of my program. HYDRA and DB >and all the rest are millions of lightyears below - because as you know Elo >can't be calculated with basic retangular maths. So a three times stronger >player cant claim Elo 6000 if it has beaten a 2000 player. Know what I mean?! > >Elo 30 000 (In words thirty thousand) is as if you would leave the solar system >of this universe and enter new worlds, so to speak. I hope I could clarify a >bit. > >Rolf, Actually from Outer Space Hi Rolf, Working within the domain of unrestrained analytic pan-dimensional quantum hyper-maths and utilising Carol Vordermanian normalising vector indices I recently evaluated that the maximum theoretically attainable elo value to be somewhere in the region of 29700 +/- 200. I therefore regrettably, have to harbour some doubt as to the veracity of your claim. Terry (a bipedal carbon based life form) ;-)
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.