Author: Len Eisner
Date: 08:53:14 02/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2000 at 07:35:05, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On February 19, 2000 at 14:34:23, Len Eisner wrote: > >>On February 19, 2000 at 13:37:35, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>On February 19, 2000 at 13:31:26, Len Eisner wrote: >>> *snip* >> Also, do you think we have finally reached the point where the best programs >>play master level (not IM or GM) positional chess? > >I don't know what you mean by master level, but I guess that the very best are >getting close to 2600. It is only a guess, intuitive, moody and erratic. Let's >say 2500 +- 200... :) > >We don't have hard proof one way or the other. > >Enrique > >>Len I was asking about positional ability. My view is that Junior 6 and the other top programs play master level positional chess. In fact, I would say these programs play master level in all facets of the game. Here’s how I would rate them: Tactical Ability: 2800 Positional Judgment: 2300 Strategic Judgment: 2200 It has been said in CCC that programs have so many positional holes a GM could drive a truck through them. I agree, but so do masters! That’s why they are not IMs or GMs. Again, I’m trying to make the case that programs play master level (2200) in every facet of the game, not IM or GM level. Programs hold their own against IMs and GMs because of their incredible tactical ability, but even that would not be enough if they were positional patzers. If this assessment is correct, it is important because we can use computers with more confidence to analyze our own games. There was a time when I would only use a computer to check for tactical mistakes in my games. Now I feel more comfortable taking their advice on just about everything. Len
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.