Author: KarinsDad
Date: 14:22:08 07/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 02, 1999 at 16:32:21, Sarah Bird wrote: [snip] >I don't see the reason to draw the line. I never said specifically Kasparov will >be better, I said different. Others will for sure be better. The reason not to >draw the line from what I can see far outweigh any reason to draw one. Lines are already being drawn. Only certain individuals are invited. Only one program gets to play in the event. The time limit is not standard times, but G25 (an advantage for the computer). There are already limits to what can and cannot occur in the tournament. > >>Mostly, at the superGM level, it is NOT a matter of pulling out a novelty >>against a program. The program doesn't get pysched out. Kasparov just has to >>play consistently good chess throughout an entire game to win. The program on >>the other hand CAN be placed on a 256 processor and can be 32x faster than >>today. The human cannot even be 2x faster. He may know a little more, but >>chances are that for any given position or even game variation, he will know >>about the same next year as he does this year. Once you get to the playing >>ability of Kasparov, it's not about outplaying your opponent. > >I think that's exactly what it's about, Kasparov don't pull out tn's every game. I mis-typed. I meant that it's not about blowing your opponent away because you are so much better. It's about minor positional, tactical, and theoretical advantages which eventually may lead to a win. > >>It's about springing theoretical novelties on him and taking extremely small >mistakes that he makes and taking advantage of them. > >It is about taking minor miscalculations and taking that through, that is >outplaying your opponent. Tn's are rare even for Kasparov 1/50 maybe (i could be >wrong) but I don't believe tn's play a significant role in his games. Moreso in >matches I would agree than in tournament chess. > >>However, half of this (the psychological half) is taken away when playing >against a computer since there are no real "theorectical novelties" against a computer. >> >I have to disagree with this also, computer opening books have variations as >pointed out here often enough whereby the human can take again a small advantage >and push it through. I agree the psychological part don't exist but tn's still >do. Not in the sense that they do in superGM human/human games. There, the advantage of a novelty is clear. In human/computer games, just playing the French or the King's Indian MAY be enough to have an advantage for the human since the program may get confused once it gets out of book. > >>Effectively, you are saying that the Fritz TEAM won the right to play whatever >>they want in the Giant section of the tournament next year. > >I am saying they have the right to program any computer and play IT next year. >There are I am sure rules attached to fritz playing as there are for human >players. > >>I am saying that they won the right to play Fritz 6 on the same hardware in >>the Giant section next year. > >How can you say that without knowing what conditions exist for winning the >masters event. The tournament organizers are the only ones who can say what they >won the right for. Agreed. We are talking in a theoretical case here, not an actual one based on what the tournament organizers decide. > >>I compare using a different program next year to a chess coach having >>the World Junior champion as a student, but the next year he has a better >>student, so the coach won the right to send whomever he wishes the next year in >>order to achieve the best results as opposed to the student winning the right >to go back the following year. >>Can you understand the difference? I thought it was clear with the steroid >>example. > >Of course I understand the difference, however next years tournament will have >the best players will it not. If one of those playing this year don't perform >this next year is it not likely that he will be replaced. Was Karpov not there >more out of attention than quality. He is only rated I think 7th. I do not consider Karpov or Anand to be the best players this year. Anand fell apart a few months back and hasn't recovered and Karpov has been dropping for several years. Why would I think any different for next year? I also would not say that the Russian Chess Federation would have had the right to play Morozevich or Svidler in the Giant section instead of Karpov this year, even though Morozevich and Svidler both seem to be playing stronger than Karpov recently. The Russian Federation (or team) would have no more right to put a stronger different contestant into the tournament next year than the Fritz team has a right to put a stronger different contestant into the tournament next year. The difference here is that people DO NOT consider a different program to be different (effectively) from year to year since the same programmers program the various versions. They consider it to effectively be the same program (i.e. it has the same name), just "slightly improved". But if I was a great chess coach who put out different strong players every year and I called them KarinsProdigy1 and KarinsProdigy2, etc. and I tried to say that KarinsProdigy2 should be allowed to play in a tournament due to KarinsProdigy1 winning the right to come back in last year tournament, people would tell me to go jump in a lake. Only KarinsProdigy1 would be allowed to come back. From my point of view as a coach (programmer), I use the same teaching (programming) techniques on both versions, they are just running on different hardware with different software. The same does not apply to computers. They have a major advantage in this area. A computer program with the same name on one set of hardware is allowed to participate in tournaments due to a different computer program with the same name on different hardware qualifying in an earlier tournament. A person with the same name could not do this. And, of course, this is why it is so hard to give a rating to a program. You have to run the same software in the same hardware configuration in order to establish a rating for it (and this rating does not apply to other versions or other hardware). KarinsDad :)
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.