Author: Shaley
Date: 03:02:02 08/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 26, 2005 at 05:18:30, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 26, 2005 at 05:08:11, Shaley wrote: > >>On August 26, 2005 at 04:53:58, Joachim Rang wrote: >> >>>On August 26, 2005 at 04:44:33, Shaley wrote: >>> >>>>On August 26, 2005 at 04:22:01, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>> >>>>>From CSS Online: >>>>> >>>>>"Neue wissensbasierte und extrem spielstarke Schach-Engine: Fritz9". Hmm does >>>>>this mean: loses to Fruit, but it's strong against humans?! >>>>> >>>>>Jouni >>>>Hi Jouni, >>>> >>>>Looks like a lot of people over here are crazy about Fruit even w/o trying it >>>>over other engines. Lol! Someone used to post, it seems, that an 11 games' >>>>tourney cannot be a proof of the programme's strengths or weaknesses. Long-term >>>>testing should be done. No-one really knows how strong the new Fritz version >>>>really is. As is said, "let's wait and see", right? Friedel used to tell me the >>>>new engine is simply packed with chess knowledge. It is only some while after >>>>when we get a chance of feeling it that we can see what he can do in reality >>>>with Fruit, Zappa and other silicon monsters. I remember Frans Morsch said in an >>>>interview that from now on they would be working to make this engine play sound >>>>chess; not good chess from the point of view of beating machines or sound chess >>>>for beating humans. They will try to make Fritz play universally sound chess; it >>>>may compete very successfully against the machines as a result, he said. But >>>>their ambition is to make an engine that will play very good chess in general >>>>terms. >>>>Cheers, >>>>Alexander >>> >>> >>>than they should have not started to implement imperfect human knowledge about >>>chess into the engine. As a result they get an engine which plays for weak >>>humans sound chess but not from an objective point of view. >>> >>>regards Joachim >> >>Well, don't you come to think you're using too strong a language about Fritz? >>You can't call it bad, it's really sound. As to chess which you call imperfect, >>I can tell you the chess of Anand, for instance, is sound enough. Same as chess >>played by top CC players. Machines have no chance in a correspondence game, and >>this is really the top chess to be produced. > >I do not think that they have no chance in a correspondence game. >GM nickel beated hydra but lost against other chess engines in a correspondence >game. > >Uri May be he used too open a strategy against them? Also, I do respect GM Nickel a lot but, I can assure you, he's not A1 in CC.
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.