Author: Albert Silver
Date: 11:23:57 02/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 27, 2000 at 11:00:30, blass uri wrote:
>On February 27, 2000 at 10:24:49, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On February 26, 2000 at 09:43:15, Georg Langrath wrote:
>>
>>>Yes the chesscomputers of today are great for both strong and weak players.
>>>
>>>But I can not understand how the programmers shall do, to make us think that we
>>>need new chessprograms in future. I mean the programs of today already have
>>>everything and more to that.
>>>
>>>Georg
>>
>>By this I presume you mean that they all play IM level and have some basic
>>database features, but to tell you the truth I believe there is room for
>>improvement on all levels. I don't mean just by squeezing out those last 20-30
>>elo points in regards to playing strength, but in balancing their tactical
>>ability and knowledge of the game among other things. The program misjudge
>>_many_ positions and though they are a great help for analyzing, they are a far
>>cry from perfect. Perhaps when they are all playing at 2700 OTB, I'll be singing
>>another tune, but for the moment that is where I stand. Even the playing
>>experience varies as their respective styles vary enormously as well. And all
>>this is just about the engine. As for the features, I think there is ample room
>>for improvement for all.
>>
>> Albert Silver
>
>I think they play better than IM level
A few play better than IM level depending on the hardware, but not all.
>
>I agree that they are not playing 2700 level but I guess that their level is
>2550 OTB
>
>The result of Rebel against GM's give it performance of more than 2500 and it
>plays in unfair conditions(not in tournaments when everyone must play everyone
>and the GM cannot prepare only against it)
>
>I agree that they do a lot of mistakes but the same is for most GM's.
The point wasn't that they play bad, but that they are far from perfect and to
declare that there is no room for improvement is a mistake IMO.
>
>I believe that humans can play better but unfortunately most humans who can get
>2650-2700 rating if they learn more about chess are not professional because
>they do not think that they can earn much money by being at 2700 level.
>
>I think that one example is GM yona kossasvilli who is working as a doctor
Nothing new here. This has been true for a long time and examples are many times
many: there was that grandmaster in the 30s (Rossolimo I believe, but I'd have
to look it up) who survived in NY as a taxi driver because chess wasn't cutting
it, or the well publicized Reuben Fine, or US champion Michael Wilder, etc...
It's unfortunate, no question about it.
Albert Silver
>
>Uri
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.