1. Standard membereyeqpc
    Robbo
    a Brave new world
    Joined
    10 Dec '03
    Moves
    8816
    08 Aug '04 17:05
    Originally posted by AsianRose
    I'm sorry to be argumentative, but anyone who thinks Fritz or Shredder would have only a 1900 level at correspondence play probably has not kept up with developments in Human vs. Computer match ups. Of course, I'm not talking about running Fritz on my 4 year old computer or something similar against master level players, but cases where someone uses a n ...[text shortened]... metimes win (and yet often lose or draw) against programs running at full power. Sad, but true.
    I still disagree, the game posted by Phlabibit clearly sees Feivel beating Fritz. Lately I have been practising my blitz play heavily in preparation for some OTB tourneys and I have been playing against Fritz on a PC with 2.5ghz CPU and 1.5gb of Ram and although Fritz beats me most of the time I have recorded several wins against it, and I had set it at full power with a so-called 2700 elo. Playing against Fritz on at a slower paced game (which gives me more analysis time) but at the same level of play on the same PC and I am beating it 70% of the time. I've been playing against computer programs since 1982 (psion chess on the speccy was the first) and although they have developed vastly they still all demonstrate the same weaknesses. i do agree with you somewhat but all these recorded games of GM's getting beat are where they have played against the program setup up on so-called 'supercomputers' with major cpu speeds and ram capacity. Most of the public ones were computers designed by IBM specifically designed for the purpose.
    You do say however that on another chess-site someone cheated with a computer and ended up topping the ranks in blitz and slow play, blitz play I can well believ but slow play I have trouble believing that, unless of course the standard of chess-players were not as high as RHP.
    You are not convincing me and their is proof on this site (see Phlabibits post) where fFritz is well beaten.
    Like I said I am playing against Fritz a lot for pratise sakes on a relatively high-powered home PC and I am beating it the majority of the time.
  2. Standard memberTheMaster37
    Kupikupopo!
    Out of my mind
    Joined
    25 Oct '02
    Moves
    20443
    08 Aug '04 17:08
    Originally posted by AsianRose
    I'm sorry to be argumentative, but anyone who thinks Fritz or Shredder would have only a 1900 level at correspondence play probably has not kept up with developments in Human vs. Computer match ups. Of course, I'm not talking about running Fritz on my 4 year old computer or something similar against master level players, but cases where someone uses a n ...[text shortened]... metimes win (and yet often lose or draw) against programs running at full power. Sad, but true.
    Given enough thinking time, a computer can check ALL possibilities of a chessgame in process (IF there was a computer powerfull enough for that, to my knowlegde, chess hasn't been analysed fully yet).

    For a computer to decide what course of action is better, it'd simply pick the move with the most winning possibilities. If there are more then one the computer would be flawed since it needs an algorithm to choose. Humans don't need an algorithm.

    As Phlabbit and consorts showed, the top 10 players here, all annihilate computerprograms used by players. I'm sure there are even better programs in the world, but those aren't accessible to your regular member of RHP.

    Humans can think up traps, plans, sacrifices and what not more. Computers rely solely on a program wich tells them what to do next. Therefore humans will keep their advantage here, and computers don't stand a chance to get high in the rankings of the site.
  3. Joined
    17 Feb '03
    Moves
    25430
    08 Aug '04 17:141 edit
    Originally posted by AsianRose
    There have been many competitions between super-GMs and chess programs at NON blitz level. There was a computer scientist and master level player who looked at this closely as part of his Ph.D, thesis. Kramnik lost several times with cl ...[text shortened]... r than this GM does, but I’d be surprised if that were the case.
    Asian Rose,

    There are other items that you neglect to mention. Computers (no matter how good) suffer from a horizon effect that humans do not. Computers also do not really get better given more time to analyze a position. A computer can get to a depth of say 13 ply relatively quickly put any increase above that is not linear but exponential in regards to time. It may take 30 seconds to reach 13 ply but it will be another 2 minutes to hit 14 then it just gets worse (time wise) from there. There have been studies as to the minimal ratying increase through a longer time control for computers. Another item is that computers can't recognize patterns that a human easily can. For example (albeit a basic one) take Legal's mate. A human chess player can recognixe that possibility in an instant. Watch a computer's analysis window, any computer program will eveluate the position in blacks favor and slowly see that it is not. A human can recognize a position (be it similar or exactly the same) and say...i played Re1 in this type of position in a game 5 years ago so I will play it here. Net time spent analysing about 5 seconds. A computer might play the same move after 15 minutes of analysis. BTW, send an unrated challenge over using any chess program or combination of programs you want 🙂

    Feivel
  4. Standard memberSirLoseALot
    Shut Gorohoviy!
    Joined
    19 May '03
    Moves
    14164
    08 Aug '04 17:32
    Originally posted by AsianRose
    I'm sorry to be argumentative, but anyone who thinks Fritz or Shredder would have only a 1900 level at correspondence play probably has not kept up with developments in Human vs. Computer match ups. Of course, I'm not talking about running Fritz on my 4 year old computer or something similar against master level players, but cases where someone uses a n ...[text shortened]... metimes win (and yet often lose or draw) against programs running at full power. Sad, but true.
    You are neglecting the fact that the computer's wins over GM's take place when it runs on 'supercomputers',as I and eyegpc said.Furthermore in those big matches vs Kramnik and Kasparov the comps have a team of GM's and computerexperts on their side who immediately fix any weak spots it may show.For instance,should a player come up with an openingnovelty that's not in the comps book it gets updated.Should it make a bad decision in a particular line and get in trouble,it gets updated.This would not be the case when someone uses it here.On a normal every day computer those engines are very much beatable(not by me though,heh).GM's would make minced meat out of it,me reckons.It's possible that the latest programs would rank higher than 1900,I don't know about that,but I very much doubt they'd be in the top.Not when it runs on a simple 'home PC'.

    Sir Lot.

    PS: By all means,be argumentative 🙂
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree