Author: Harald Faber
Date: 04:56:28 03/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 1999 at 10:04:37, odell hall wrote: > A few Days ago on ICC, I had a very lengthy discussion with a Fide Master >concerning Computer chess, and it's strengths. My overall impression of the >conversion is that the Fide master had very little respect for computer chess >play. What I thought was odd, is that the master acknowledged that micro >programs are very strong, However he seems to believe that this fact is negated >by the style of the programs play. For instance I asked him, If he believed that >computers were grandmaster strength. His answer was no!, his reasons were that >they have a complete different chess style. It appears that many humans confuse >chess style with strength, as to say if a computer does not play like a human >grandmaster than it is not grandmaster strength. My definition of grandmaster >strength is if a program could achieve a grandmaster norm, regardless of which >style it uses to achieve that result. Ed Schoeder in his Article "The end of >computer Chess progress" , stated that the best results in grandmaster chess >today are not always achieved by playing beautiful chess. In other words it is >the result's that are really important not the mechanics of chess play. I agree >100% and that is why style of play is irrelevant to me in choosing a chess >partner, strength is most important to me. What is missing in this statement is that some programs kind of suffer from their style. E.g. some IMs say Nimzo98/99 isn't as strong (=dangerous) as Hiarcs or MCP. Finally you are right, if a program plays 2500+ rated then it IS GM strength, no matter which style it plays. But the style will influence the performance against humans of course so style in that way is important.
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.