Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:39:51 11/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 1999 at 09:44:14, James T. Walker wrote: >On November 08, 1999 at 02:40:46, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>On November 07, 1999 at 21:02:40, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On November 07, 1999 at 17:17:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On November 07, 1999 at 15:58:54, odell hall wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 07, 1999 at 10:32:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 07, 1999 at 03:23:21, Lawrence S. Tamarkin wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Bob, On the other hand, you could be like Bobby Fischer when asked for his list >>>>>>>of the 10 greatest player's, he was asked why he hadn't included himself on this >>>>>>>list; the answer of course was that he would best any of them, so felt it would >>>>>>>take away a placing of one of his selected 10:) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Larry T >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Nah... I just had the opportunity to get to know everyone on my "list" >>>>>>pretty well (excepting Greenblatt although I talked to him several times >>>>>>by phone). They are head-and-shoulders above me or anyone else I could >>>>>>think of. :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> If they are "head and shoulders" above everyone then why haven't they produced >>>>>any quality chess programs in the last 15 years? (excluding ofcourse hsu) It >>>>>seems to me the people you list are more or less pioneers in computerchess, but >>>>>does this mean that they are the best? Because someone was first does this mean >>>>>that they are neccesarily the best? I think 1. Hsu 2. Lang 3. Jonothan Dekoning >>>>>(king engine) 3. Schroeder is more appropriate to the question. Or would you >>>>>mind educating us specifically on what makes these people you mentioned better >>>>>than others? >>>> >>>> >>>>Nothing other than the fact that they each _dominated_ computer chess when >>>>they were active _and_ they published details about what they did. >>>> >>>>Any other questions? >>> >>>Hello Bob, >>>But wasn't that because they had access to the fastest hardware at the time and >>>there was very little competition? The same might be said of Cray Blitz which >>>was much faster than say Sargon 2.5 on a 6502 @ 2Mhz. >>>Jim Walker >> >>"Had access"? Greenblatt built his hardware! So did Thompson. So does Hsu. >> >>Dave > >Hello Dave, >Well of course it's important where they got their hardware too. The fact that >they built the fast hardware means they made an even greater contribution than >just writing the programs. That doesn't detract from the fact that this >"Special" hardware that Thompson made didn't help him to be better than a lot of >programs that did not have access to that kind of speed. Actually I think Ken >did not build his hardware; A friend built it to his requirements if I rember >correctly. Of course having the facilities of Bell Laboratories at your >disposal does not hurt either. There is no doubt about the contributions of the >people that Bob mentions though. They were all pioneers in the infancy of Chess >Programming. >Jim Walker Actually Ken Thompson and Joe Condon _did_ build Belle. Ken did the original design, and both worked on putting it all together.
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.