Author: Steve
Date: 00:19:46 11/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 1999 at 20:35:05, Charles Unruh wrote: >On November 01, 1999 at 20:13:09, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On November 01, 1999 at 19:56:01, Charles Unruh wrote: >> >>>How can we ever have Regular(non GM)tourneys on the net when comps exist. >>>People are always talking about how the internet is the future of chess. >>>However how can anyone reasonably trust ones opponents. They can use books, >>>computers, even assistance from stronger players. I'm cheated on so much on the >>>net that i don't even play on ICC or FICS, i just look. Besides from what i can >>>see playing many blitz games does NOTHING to improve your game. For example >>>Mindman on FICS a real life 1600 uscf player when he started on fics 3 or 43 >>>years ago. Around the time he started he maintained a 1600-1750 internet >>>rating, now after 13000 games! his rating has dropped to 1300(steady) internet. >>>This guy is actually a PH.D so it's not because he's a moron either >>It seems that the possible explanation you are looking for is computer cheaters. >> This is one possible explanation. >Actually i wasn't relating that to cheating, just that playing tons of games >doesn't necessarily improve your game. > >It is also true that players abiltity tends >>to degrade somewhat over time. In any case, you can only improve your game by >>playing against better players. I think computer cheating is pretty bizarre, >>since the rating means nothing anyway. Suppose you played against nothing but >>deep blue, disguised as "patzer_player" elo 1000. Of course, you would get >>whupped again and again, but the powerful engine would reveal the weaknesses in >>your game. > >As for reveling the weakness of your game, it could however and unfortunately >this is rarely the case, for the strange reason is that on icc amd even in real >life bad play is frequently rewarded with WINS, thus since it is extremely rare >that people really get down and analyse their game, the pattern of bad play >frequently continues and becomes engrained in the thought processes resulting in >a 1600 player losing 300 points after playing 13000 games. > > So even then there is a hidden benefit. >> >>I don't think that the internet is going to replace OTB tournaments. > >I don't think it should either but that is just what MANY claim. > I don't >>think anybody believes that. But it is a good place to find a fun game, isn't >>it? And if you play against a cheater, that's just part of the risk. They have >>sold their integrity for the hollowest imaginable victory -- a fake rating that >>does not even matter. > >Fake rating matters to the people who are cheating. I HATE to do it, but i >reffer to Robert Hyatt, i was once asking something about why would a GM care >about an internet rating, and the answer was something to the effect that "They >do". So saying that an internet rating means nothing to you has no bearing on >what it means to someone else regardless of how they get it. About 4 years ago >a friend of mine created an account on fics, cheated to get the rating up to >2600, then played a bunch of games against himself as an unregistered player to >wipe out all signs of the games that had been played so that no one could test >for computer play. He still logs on as the 2600 player from time to time as >this unknown 2600 player and BASKS in the glory and he feels great! The GLORY? It's a game. Who cares what his rating is? To tell you the truth, I see a rating of 2600, and my first thought is that this person is probably spending far too much time on chess to accomplish anything important in life.
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.