Author: Charles Unruh
Date: 15:49:53 01/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
rt Silver >> >>Hi Albert, >> >>I am OK with you disagreeing with me - but please allow me to put forward some >>evidence to support my case. > >If you didn't, what would I possibly have to disagree with? :-) > >> >>Firstly, from where you've made your interjection, I assume that the point that >>you disagree with is that computers would be expected to score about 80 Elo >>points higher at active time controls than at tournament time controls. Please >>correct me if I'm wrong. >> >>Now, Selective Search magazine has been published since 1985 (the web site is >>http://www.elhchess.demon.co.uk/ ). >> >>I can't remember when, but in the past, an in-depth study of how different clock >>settings affect the expected rating of a computer was published. In the current >>issue (Dec '99 - Jan '00), as they do in every year end issue, they have >>published summary tables of expectations how different time controls affect the >>expected outcome. As everyone knows, computers will do relatively better at >>faster time controls than human players will. Briefly, the results are as >>follows: >> >>Tournament Chess: Normal >>Active Chess (G/30): +80 Elo >>Blitz Chess (G/5 or G/10): +200 Elo >> >>Selective Search was originally set up with the specific aim in mind of >>providing more accurate information to chess computer consumers about the >>strength of the machines, so they take the issue very seriously. At the present >>time, their highest rating for a chess computer is 2620 > >I'm sure they are very serious, but that doesn't make them right. I have never >had the opportunity to read their publication, but as I understand it, their >ratings include the SSDF ratings. As I don't think the SSDF ratings have any >value towards deciding the relative strength of computers against humans, the >very basis of their ratings becomes valueless in my opinion. Any calculations >made from them would be equally futile, with all due respect. You want my gut >feeling? On a 500 Mhz PC, the programs in 40/2 are playing a little over 2500. A little over 2500 woul be what most all of us here would consider grandmaster strength. >They are outstandingly consistent in what they do, but conceptual chess will >still be our greatest weapon against them. Conceptual positionally, and >conceptual tactically. That's why some combinations, though relatively simple to >calculate are beyond them for the moment. > > Albert Silver > > >>(though they state that >>up to 60 Elo points could be added if one posseses a 500 Mhz PC). >> >>I'll leave it at that for now - but if this isn't good enough, I suppose I'm >>going to have to rummage through my pile of old issues to look for the original >>article about how these calculations were made. >> >>-g >> >>>> , then we must be saying >>>>that right now the computers are about 2620 Elo - which isn't bad (if a little >>>>lower than the 2664 - 2674 that SSDF seem to be saying Tiger can achieve). >>>> >>>>-g
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.