Author: stuart taylor
Date: 03:12:45 02/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2000 at 22:44:48, Pete Galati wrote: >On February 10, 2000 at 22:35:08, stuart taylor wrote: > >>On February 10, 2000 at 16:55:44, Pete Galati wrote: >> >>>On February 10, 2000 at 16:35:20, C Morris wrote: >>> >>>>Bronstein seemed to be saying that Chess was for everyone. He was trying to get >>>>the point over by pointing to the attitude of grandmasters like Botvinnik, who, >>>>to paraphrase Bronstein in "The Sorcerer's Apprentice", thought only they knew >>>>how to move a knight, push a pawn, etc. I like Bobby Fisher's attitude when he >>>>said, he only "believes in good moves." I just like good moves whether or not >>>>they come from Junior or Kasparov or a class player. I have no problems with the >>>>idea shared by more than a few grandmasters, that someday a computer will be >>>>world champion. This does not threaten anything. Just my opinion. >>> >>>If there are Grandmasters that think a program will become world champion then >>>they don't have a very clear idea what they're talking about. The game of Chess >>>itself is between 2 people. >>> >>>Once a program enters the picture, that's a different story. Having a human >>>Chess world champion and having a computer Chess world champion are 2 different >>>things completely. >>> >>>Pete >> >> Dosen't world champion mean best player? Atleast isn't that what such a >>grandmaster(or any person) would be meaning to infer? >> S.Taylor. > >Second question isn't very clear, and they appear to be linked together too >closely to answer the first question. > >Pete Second question was refering to what you wrote. But at any rate, can't Best chess-playing entity be man or machine? S.Taylor
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.