Author: John Warfield
Date: 13:23:43 12/13/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 1999 at 15:09:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 13, 1999 at 14:58:30, walter irvin wrote: > >>On December 12, 1999 at 20:40:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 12, 1999 at 17:24:52, John Warfield wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Could you please tell me what your 2450 projection is for, on what machine? >>>>Also I am curious what you would rate the best computer programs on these >>>>platforms 1. Amd 600 2. Amd 300 3 MMX 200 >>>> >>>>Thanks >>> >>> >>>I think the best of today's programs, on the best of today's hardware, is >>>playing at a 2450 (roughly) level (FIDE rating). I don't think cutting the >>>hardware speed by a factor of 2, nor doubling the hardware speed, would make >>>any significant change... The problem is that the programs are good tactically, >>>but have significant positional holes that speed won't help. >>> >>>I think programs will continue to improve, but only as those 'holes' are >>>covered up solidly... >> >>do you believe that there are certain types of positions that computers play >>better than humans and if so is it posible to gear the programs style and >>opening book toward that goal .also what effect would haveing 4 or 5 different >>engines with completely different styles available to the program have vs human >>if the program randomly chose a different engine every 4 or 5 moves?????? that >>asuming that all the engines were strong . > > >1. "Do I believe that there are..." Yes. I remember playing a game using >Cray Blitz at the 1984 US Open, against a 2400 (USCF) player. He finally >resigned, saying "this was impossible for me... pieces pinned, pieces >threatened, pieces on one side of the board attacking things on the other... >It was just too much to keep up with..." > >2. "Is it possible to gear ..." Yes and No. A GM has a _lot_ to say about >what happens in a game. If he plays for a draw, it is _very_ difficult to avoid >drawing, without taking substantial risk. If he plays for a win, you have a >good chance of leading the game into interesting positions. But forcing the >game into wild tactics is simply not possible. The program has to be prepared >to play tactical lines, and also to handle strategic lines, or it won't have a >chance against a GM. How has rebel managed to Draw atleast 5 times against grandmaster players if it plays so stretigically bad??
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.