Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Strength of the engine in chess programs

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 08:42:21 05/24/02

Go up one level in this thread


On May 24, 2002 at 08:31:59, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>Thanks.
>
>We have two open issues.
>
>1. My question about the first game in '97. Why Kasparov couldn't repeat his
>dominating play against DB2? Was a general question about the apparent twist in
>the match after the first game. BTW the mistakes of the machine were widely
>analyzed and "accepted", as far as game 1 is concerned. Could you comment on the
>mistakes, the twist and their reasons?
>




I still don't understand the question.  Kasparov won game one, in what I
consider to be a _very_ lucky manner.  He lost an exchange.  He just happened
to end up with a couple of passed pawns that were not stoppable over time.  I
am not sure he planned on that happening, but it did.  He didn't try to repeat
game one again.  In game two the colors were switched.  In game 3 he tried a
different opening.

So I don't know what you mean by "why kasparov couldn't repeat his
dominating play against DB2?"  I don't see where he tried...




>2. The Eduard Nemeth bet. Ok, fine. I talked to him via chat and he says he
>wants 30 minutes games. But since he hasn't really understood yet our debate
>here, he tought that it was a challenge from your side out of the blue, and his
>first question was "how much money for each point". Well, I promissed him 200 ?
>(euro) from _my_ side, but explained that 10 game only wouldn't be enough, it
>should be about 20 or 30 games overall. Could you please comment a little bit
>from your knowledge about similar "bets" on ICC and the probable outcome? I mean
>would you say that GM Roman would win 1 pt. pro 10 games trivially or is that
>already difficult for him in 30' games?


Roman would _definitely_ win one of every 10 games.  Against _any_ program.
And that would be a lower bound.  I would suspect he would win at least
4 and perhaps do better depending on how well his opponent was able to avoid
the kinds of positions Roman is good at setting up.






>
>Another technical problem was for Eduard, who never played on ICC, that he
>thinks he could only play on the new FRITZ server. Well, what is your opinion to
>the technical problems. Could it be made possible to connect the two servers for
>the little event? Or would you also say, what I have told Eduard, that the two
>servers are probably similar for the players. Ahm, I remember, Fritz server has
>a direct connection between the players, where you know exactly how long the
>delay and stuff like this. Please give us your judgement, it could be
>interesting for many potential players from Europe.


He can easily download a windows version of winboard, install it, and
connect to ICC instantly.  It is very easy to set up and run.  There are
other ICC clients as well...   zics, blitzen, you-name-it...

He can log in as a guest to avoid joining, or he could do the free-week deal
with no cost...




>
>And to the chess results, would you mind giving a border line, Eduard in your
>opinion could not overstep, e.g. 2 pts. or something? Final question, and please
>just for the German player who gives so much heart blood into computerchess,
>what could be the prospects for someone like Eduard (understood that he might
>even win 3 pts/10 games) in the world of CC?
>
>Thanks a lot for your answers
>
>Rolf Tueschen


What is Edward's FIDE (or equivalent) rating?  If he is (say) 2150, then I
would be surprised if he won two games, or if he drew four.  Or any combination
to produce 2 points in 10 games.

I don't think computers are "magic" in any way.  But a 2100-level player, while
able to win a game here and there, is going to be hard-pressed to win a single
game against a reasonable computer opponent.  I am, of course, curious whether
he can actually do so or not, from an academic point of view...






This page took 0.01 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.