Author: Zheng Zhixian
Date: 18:13:41 09/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2005 at 19:15:10, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On September 05, 2005 at 18:08:45, Zheng Zhixian wrote: > >>If all you like to do is to play against computer opponents, a normal chess >>forum or site might be more suitable for you I think. > > >I already read something the like from Thorsten. Your advice is wrong. Playing >against computers as a human is NOT human chess=normal chess. It's >computerchess. Though I don't necessarily agree, that's not the point. It's clear that the vast majority of people here are interested in something else, and trying to moan and groan about it is futile. The point is even if computerchess includes human versus computer, computer versus computer is clearly vastly more popular here and that is definitely computer chess. To protest against it, for example by making a thread mocking subject lines is like trying to turn back the tide. The impostering that computerchess is ONLY engine vs engine chess >is imagination but not reality. Engine vs engine chess is sort of testing and >has no real value for a human who wants to play computers. Why do ordinary people want to play computers? Is it really different from the reasons they want to play chess in general? If not, what makes it computer chess? I would say that one of the main goals of computer chess is to measure and define the strength of chess programs. Yet another is to spot weaknesses in chess programs and improve them. If your main aim is to play chess just for the joy of playing chess or for general improvement (no anticomputer chess), I don't really see how it can be considered computer chess. I think discussing new features to help peoples benefit from using chess software might possibly fall into the area of computer chess. Altough, I think this is perhaps secondary to the main purpose of improvement of one's chess ability - a topic also typically discussed in none-computer chess circles. As I said testing >isn't even providing you with significant results because you dont have the time >to test a certain version of a prog because then the next version is already >coming. I disagree. There is nothing stopping you from continuing to test the old version. And given that computer versus computer is a time honored way used by chess programers to find out if an engine has improved, clearly your statement is not absolute law.
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.