Author: John Warfield
Date: 13:17:07 12/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1999 at 14:39:06, Charles Unruh wrote:
>On December 13, 1999 at 13:13:58, blass uri wrote:
>
>>On December 13, 1999 at 11:03:16, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote:
>>
>>>Intelligence test:
>>>
>>>Can you see the main difference between the following statements? (solution will
>>>be providet later today)
>>>
>>>- " In other words, HIARCS 7 plays tournament chess on a par with the top five
>>>players in the U.S. " (Kaufman)
>>>
>>>- " Computers are GM strength. " (Unruh)
>>
>>I guess that the first sentence means only that hiarcs played tournament games
>>at the level of GM's(probably against computers or humans who did not try to
>>play in an anti-computer style).
>>
>>It does not say that it can get 50% against GM's because GM's can change their
>>style against hiarcs and the result will be that hiarcs is "
>
>going to stop playing like a GM. "Oh so you admit it plays like a GM?"
>
>No such thing, Just because a specific indidvidual looks up all of your
>weaknesses does not mean that you are not playing at grandmaster strength. It
>just means that the person who prepared is playing stronger than what they would
>normally, because they have specific knowledge that they don't normally have.
> I could take H7 out the same day and play it against another GM, and H7 could
>very well win. I'll take a risk and point out a specific example of a human.
>GM Kaidanaov showed up in the US and for a bit he was RULING american chess,
>after a while U.S GM's became more prepared for him, he no longer has strings
>of great victories in the U.S. However it doesn't mean that he's not
>grandmaster strength, He still beats 99.~% of the patzers, and H7 will do the
>same thing, It will beat at least the same %of the population and chessplayers
>as a low GM. However this is off the topic, and it concedes the point. You
>would be making the claim that "Yes H7 plays Grandmaster strength, but after a
>while when everyone knows it's weakneses, then the grandmasters will beat it,
>but until then it would be GM strength". Something that is of a side note is
>that frequently when a GM tries to alter his own natural style to get someone
>else or a computer in this case frequently this actually results in them playing
>weaker chess(not always but in many cases yes indeed).
Charles I agree with most of what you say, however I must point out that b
because a computer lacks counsciousness it's performance may be somewhat less
than that of a human grandmaster. They allow draws where a human would never do
so, . I see this as the last challenge for programmers to create a program that
would play more aggressive keeping in memory the ratings of it's opponents.
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.