Author: Albert Silver
Date: 10:30:52 12/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 1999 at 12:49:48, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On November 30, 1999 at 01:32:41, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>
>>On November 29, 1999 at 09:10:26, Albert Silver wrote:
>>
>>>Guadeloupe isn't exactly a hotbed for strong chess players. I'm not sure how
>>>much he can learn from such games.
>>>
>>> Albert Silver
>>
>>I must concur, but am also compelled to comment that Christophe's war chest of
>>386s isn't exactly a hotbed of speed either. :)
>>
>>Dave
>
>
>That's exactly the point. Using a 386sx-20MHz again and again against players
>that understand where the weaknesses of the program are is a terrible test,
>believe me.
>
>For years, they wanted to play against Chess Tiger because it was fun to beat
>"the" computer.
>
>Tiger had no learning, and usually the same player tried to play the same
>unsound king attack over and over until he won. Usually it took several trials
>because the human player would do a tactical mistake. I did not prevent them
>from doing so.
>
>I have learned a lot with this.
>
>
>
> Christophe
I understand, and this brings to mind Ed's comment sometime ago in which he
explained how hard it was nowadays to see where and when Rebel was improving or
not, simply due to the depth and strength of the program. Naturally, it is much
easier to see what it is doing wrong at 6-7 plies than 11-12, nevertheless the
difference between a 2000 rated player and an GM rated 2500 is not merely one of
depth of calculation. Naturally, the GM is calculating far deeper, but there is
more involved. Suppose your program is getting 6-7 plies in a long game on your
386 and as such you have really maximized the knowledge and performance
according to what you have available. All the same, there are probably certain
things that simply cannot be done on a 386 that could be implemented on a more
powerful computer, because that more powerful computer has an edge that goes
beyond merely doing the same thing the 386 does but faster. This is why it is
impossible to properly compare programs like DB or Cray Blitz with other PC
programs. That is why comments like "if Hiarcs ran on a Cray it would be
stronger than Cray Blitz" have no meaning, as the program is inseparable from
the hardware. I think that as hardware develops, new things are possible in
programs that weren't possible in the past, but at the same time these newer
generation programs won't be retro-compatible, because what they do is only
possible with this new hardware.
Albert Silver
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.