Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 16:51:17 11/07/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2005 at 18:19:55, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 07, 2005 at 16:36:40, Derek Paquette wrote: > >>This doesn't mean much unfortunately, >> >>unless its classical time control where the opponent has time to think all his >>moves through, its an advantage for the machine before the first piece moves. > >It is also an advantage for the machine before the first piece move if it is a >classical time control. > >Humans are simply not strong in chess and time control is not relevant. > >I am also not sure if slower time control are better for the human. > >Some humans may have better chances to beat chess programs at blitz when at long >time control the machines do not do the same errors that they do in blitz. > >I remember that adams after drawing against Junior some years ago claimed that >he could beat Junior easily in blitz with the same opening when it trained >against it at home but it turned out that Junior played better at long time >control and could draw the game. > >Uri Uri maybe you're not strong in chess. It's quite wrong to say things like "Humans are not strong in chess" or "Humans are weak in Chess". I've a "Computer Like Memory" these things won't get passed me. Terry
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.