Author: Chris Carson
Date: 11:30:38 04/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 08, 1999 at 12:44:50, Steven Schwartz wrote: >I know many of us believe that certain chess programs >perform better against humans than they do against >computers (and vice versa), but does anyone have any >actual objective evidence to this effect? >- Steve (ICD/Your Move) Just my opinion (and $100 will get a cup of coffee). Chess is chess. No difference. Today's top programs on fast machines are top caliber players (several masters have posted as much here and GM's have written as much in Chess Life). Most (Soltis is an exception, see latest Chess Life) strong players (master and above) use computers as study partners. In my opinion, Humans learn and adapt faster (unless stuborn) than a machine. I have not seen any data that shows that a high rating in comp vs comp would not correspond to a high rating against humans (perhaps not exact, but close). AGEON and other events show this as well, computers have done very well in these events. Most GM's are scared to play a top program on a fast computer in public. Chess is 99% tactics. Computers excell at this. Both Human and Top programs have very extensive (good) opening book knowledge. Both have good endgame knowledge (not true of programs in the 80's or before, but very true today). Humans have better intuition in middle game, computers are more pragmatic in the middle game. Each style has benefits, I trust the pragmatic analysis most. Just an opinion. Ok, shoot darts at me. Chris Carson Licensed Professional Counselor (Texas), Computer Engineer, Texas Instruments Avid chess player for 30 years.
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.