Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:54:56 09/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 14, 1999 at 04:36:53, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On September 13, 1999 at 23:24:29, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On September 13, 1999 at 19:41:14, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >> >>>I've had similar experiences on ICC. I seem to be able to score more than my >>>fair share of draws against the computer programs playing there. If I try to win >>>I get "embarassed". But when I play to draw, the games I've been successful (5 3 >>>blitz unrated) at have followed 1 of 2 patterns: >>> >>>1) One of the crafty clones has a penchant for unsound gambits (Englund gambit >>>with f7-f6). I play solidly with a caro pawn structure and exchange down to an >>>ending, which I draw. >>>2) I play an exchange sac, which computer programs do not cope with as well as >>>they should. They don't understand the importance of activating their rook. One >>>game I almost won, but I screwed up and allowed counterplay and had to force a >>>draw. >>> >>>I'm 2411 on ICC. My best score in one day was 2 draws out of 4 games if I >>>remember correctly. I feel pretty sure these programs are easier to draw than >>>GMs. >> >>Not to be Mr. Hormone Dude or anything, but I'd be happy to take you up on this >>as well. If you want to play a match of perhaps 10 games of 5 0, let's set up a >>time. If you want to play with increment, I'm less confident of the result, but >>I'll do that as well. >> >>bruce > >It's definitely your hormones doing the talking. I made a GENERAL statement >about computer programs in GENERAL. At no point did I single out your program. I >made no claim concerning about state of the art programs on really fast >hardware. I've coroborated what I've said in another post and I don't have to do >any more than that. It's funny that you should take a general statement and >react to it like it was an attack on the quality of your own program. Insecure >maybe? I don't think he (or I) took this as an "attack". We _did_ take it as a state- ment that is very difficult to swallow. Remember, Bruce and I have _both_ watched our programs play a tremendous number of games on the various chess servers. And against GM players that are in the top 10 in the world we don't see an excessive number of draws in blitz time controls. A couple of IMs have given up on winning pretty much, and specifically play for draws, trying to trade queens and pieces to reach drawable endgames. And they have _very_ poor luck in drawing (todays programs are _not_ lousy endgame players, just ask _any_ IM/GM on the servers...) Whenever we see a statement like yours, we simply try to verify it. We had a similar 'challenge' a year ago where someone (a 1600 player) claimed that he could produce a much better result against computers than his rating would justify. At long time controls. After 50+ games, he had zero wins and zero draws. He did reach one ending where he might have drawn with perfect play (it was heading toward a drawn ending in KRP KR or something similar) but ICC went down and the game was lost... But I am always interested in such challenges, because I have been working on this problem for a couple of years now, trying to stop the 'draw seekers' from having success. I've done pretty well at it too, but am always interested in being shown where I have not done so well... When I responded to you initially, I didn't intend to sound aggressive or anything. Just a friendly offer to "show me". The same offer I make to anyone that is interested. Because clearly, avoiding draws 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.