Author: blass uri
Date: 13:11:23 10/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 1999 at 16:00:08, James Robertson wrote: >On October 15, 1999 at 15:38:11, James T. Walker wrote: > >>On October 15, 1999 at 15:25:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On October 15, 1999 at 15:08:59, odell hall wrote: >>> >>>>On October 15, 1999 at 15:00:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 15, 1999 at 13:25:17, Howard Exner wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Anyone have the scoop on this re-match? Watching the one game on the rebel page >>>>>>but how are the other three games unfolding? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Rebel won 1 game, lost 2, and drew 1. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Unfortunately a very disapointing result for Rebel, I bet your real happy! I >>>>don't know what these two losses mean , since the I'ms are very strong and >>>>capable of beating any grandmaster on any given day. >>> >>> >>>_I_ happen to be pulling for the computer in every game. But I am realistic >>>in my expectations of the outcome. This result wasn't bad. 1.5 vs 2.5 for >>>4 IM players in 4 40/2hr games is not a bad result. It is right in line with >>>what I would expect/hope for myself. 2-2 would have been very good. >> >>Honestly Bob, >>This is a disappointing performance by Rebel. Considering it's past performance >>vs GMs/IMs. But it also is to be expected. Human IM's/GM's also have bad >>results occasionally. Only the overall performance is what matters. In that >>respect it is still doing very good. I think we should not lose sight of the >>fact that this type of "Challenge" will show the computers in the worst >possible light. > >Why? > >>There can be no doubt that computers playing in a 4 round swill style >>system or even in a round robin tournament would do much better than what we >>will see in this format. It will not give us the "Rating" we are looking for >>unless the worst case rating is what you're trying to establish. >>Jim Walker > >I disagree. It does not seem obvious to me that Rebel would do better in a >tournament, and there is no evidence to suggest this. > >James The simple fact is that in a tournament the players are not prepared only against one player. There is another reason to assume Rebel would do better in a tournament The reason is very simple: the level in chess is not transitive. GM can be better than an IM IM can be better than a computer and the computer can be better than the first GM. The first GM knows that Rebel is better than him(her) so (s)he is not going to play against Rebel in this situation. (s)he may play in a tournament when rebel is only one of 10 players (s)he is going to play. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.