Author: KarinsDad
Date: 12:54:40 04/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 1999 at 15:31:47, odell hall wrote: >Hi CCC > > I am sure we all Miss Dr. Hyatt (I know I do!). However I think that it is >very convient for Dr. Hyatt to disappear! now that computers are proving in >front of the world that they are Grandmasters!! (Beating a 2673 at game\60 over >several games is not an IM Performance!!) It seems now he doesn't have explain >how it is possible for a so-called "weak International Master" ( Hyatts >Acessment of Top Programs) to Defeat a Fide Elo 2677 in a match at faster than >action chess time controls. In my view If fritz is capable of Beating A super >grandmaster at game\60 which is a reasonably long game, then no doubt it is >grandmaster strength. Ofcourse there is more than this isolated match to come >to this conclusion, kasparov himself said in his recent speech in the united >states that micro programs are now over 2600! Ofcourse We have many >international masters and Grandmasters saying the same things, including Larry >Kaufman. It is now starting to look very silly for anyone to say otherwise, >those that maintain this viewpoint will no doubt lose credibility in the eyes of >the computer chess public. Actually, I will be the first one to step up and look silly. From your post, you indicated one match and the opinions of several GMs for your conclusion. This response is based solely on the information in your post. Although your conclusion is based on the opinions of several GMs, it is not based on enough evidence to be conclusive. It is still an opinion. Without further data, basing it on one match between a computer and a 2600+ GM is irresponsible. Anand just came in a three way tie for 8th place in a major tournament with 10 superGM level players. I would not make the conclusion that Anand is no longer the second or third best player in the world based on this one tournament. You have no idea whether Judit was fatigued, ill, trying to prove that she could match tactics with the computer, OR the computer is GM strength at G30 and G60. Your "evidence" is faulty. This also does not show whether a computer is GM strength at standard tournament times. So, all in all, although the evidence that programs are at or approaching GM strength is mounting, it is not conclusive evidence quite yet (or at least the evidence in your post is not sufficient). KarinsDad :)
This page took 0.02 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.