Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:02:10 03/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 24, 1999 at 18:24:40, Todd Durham wrote: >On March 24, 1999 at 08:23:16, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On March 24, 1999 at 01:15:13, Peter Kappler wrote: >> >>> >>>Most of us agree that the top human players are still quite a bit stronger than >>>any commercial chess program at regular tournament time controls (40/2). >>> >>>It is also not debatable that as the time control gets faster, the relative >>>strength of the computers increases. And this leads to my question: >>> >>>At what speed are the computers clearly stronger? How fast would the game have >>>to be for you to put your money on a top-micro instead of a top GM like Kasparov >>>or Anand? >>> >>>Here are my opinions: >>> >>>40/2 super-GM wins pretty easily. >>>G/60 super-GM, but the games are interesting. >>>G/15 super-GM, but now the games are very well-fought. >>>G/5 super-GM, but I would be nervous about my money... >>>G/3 computer >> >>Hard to say. Depends on the length of the match and of course the player's form. >>In 5-6 games, I'd give the micro a clear nod anyhow, but in 20 games I think the >>Super GM would come out on top. Of course, it also depends on the micro. Throw >>the thing on an Digital Alpha and I'll bet all my chips on the machine. The >>biggest problem with g/3 and g/5 especially, is the time lost making the move. A >>player like Hawkeye (IM Schmaltz) or Dlugy (GM Dlugy) from ICC are monstrous g/1 >>players (you have to see them to believe it. No pieces hanging and they actually >>play chess) but they can NEVER compete against a program because every move they >>make will lose time and is therefore a death warrant. Curiously I don't think >>that in g/1 comps play much better than them. They don't hang pieces as well, >>but they don't see very far and here the GM's positional instincts might become >>a factor. >> >> Albert Silver > >I've watched Dlugy play 1 0 and you're right, it's astounding! So what about >Dlugy (or other strong human) v (random strong computer program) at 1 1 so that >the human doesn't perforce lose on time? > >Todd Durham Here is a bit of data. Dlugy plays lots of 3 0 and 5 0 vs crafty, but he has recently tried some 5 2 games: Crafty has won 6, lost 2 and drawn 1. Most were 5 2, with a couple of 5 3 games to boot. I don't find the 5 0 vs 5 3 scores that different. Players like Dlugy aren't losing on time very often. They get into tactical trouble.
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.