Author: KarinsDad
Date: 23:20:21 02/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 1999 at 01:21:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: [snip] > > >No... the programs have much _better_ time management than 'humans'. That >is the point. In a 0 increment game, humans often get into a good position >but take too long in doing so. With an increment, they can take that advantage >and turn it into a win. Not real often, mind you, but often enough to be >noticed... Yes, this goes back to my original question to Bruce. My effective question was whether it was that the program had an advantage due to poor human performance vs. blitz (and this is related to time management) or was there something else. In order to clarify, let's take the example of 10 0 vs. 5 5. These times are very similar in most cases. Therefore, the human should not have much of an advantage using the 5 5 time limit. And in fact, for a well written program, it's rating should be just as good (or nearly as good) at 5 5 as it is at 10 0 (all other things being equal) versus humans. The only place where this may not hold is in the example of a human getting an advantage and being able to maintain it (due to him having at least 5 seconds for every move). This is the "something else" that Bruce and you responded with. However, I wonder if this is truly the case. To find out, I think one would have to compare 10 0 games from the same human opponent vs. 5 5 games over a large number of games. Comparing 5 0 and 5 5 doesn't make sense. Granted, that in a 5 5 game of over 60 moves each, the human would have more time in which to play and would theoretically have a slight advantage because of it. But I truly wonder how many times this happens and how many times the human wins because it happens. Do you have statistics in this area Robert? [snip] >> >>Programs can be changed to disallow this as well. They can keep track of who >>they played and when, and with which opening, etc. The IM played e4 last time, >>so instead of e6 I will play c6, and next time I will play c5. >> >>There are no disadvantages to automated programs, just disadvantages to what is >>coded within them. >> >>KarinsDad > > >your statement is right, but the _idea_ is _wrong_. The entire purpose of >putting an automatic program on ICC is to play as many games as possible. Not >to play just a few to protect your rating (at least in my case this is the way >I think). So I don't try to 'fix' something by avoiding that opponent. I try >to fix it by making the program respond automatically (such as learning, or >recognizing the case where my opponent is trying to 'shuffle' and run me out >of time, and so forth). Ok, but having a program play a different (or possibly random) opening each time (even without recognizing who the opponent is) on a chess server is probably a good thing. KarinsDad
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.