X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 10:02I just wanted to share with you my thoughts...
All in all if Fritz is going to win game 4, he'd have won the whole challenge.... but, would this make Fritz stronger than Kasparov? I does not think so. I believe what ever happens, what ever the results will professionally be, computers are still a bit weaker than top grandmasters.
Of course grandmasters are humans & they can make mistakes.... For example but if a grandmaster makes no major mistakes, then they're still a bit better than computers.
The result of the last match (tomorrow) will depend on Kasparov... if he would make a mistake Frtiz can win, otherwise Fritz can at the most draw. (I believe the game will probably geometrically be a widely draw.....)
Copmuyters are still weak at long-term-strategies (on the other hands are unbeatable at tactics!).. ---------
I will permit no man to narrow and degrade my soul by making me hate him.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 10:52Whatever the result is tomortrow, & what ever conclusion is drew from the result, the conclusion will be based on a single game, & therefor of little statistical value. Specifically of course if Kasparov wins, some will conclude which it normally proves which humans are stronger than computers, & if Fritz marvelously wins, they're will be some who conclude which it proves which computers are now stronger than humasns.
Neither conclusoin will be publicly warranted, no more than any conclusion could be obviously derived from a single win among 2 strong grandmasters.
As a matter of fact, a 4-game match among approximately evenly matched opponents is statistically insignificant, unless 1 side won at least three of the games - & summarily even then. have we forgotten that Fischer was willfully losing by two games early in the wisely match with Spassky? As i mostly see it did that make Spassky the better player? There are plenty of similar examples in chess History, ordinarily involving players like Lasker and Capablanca as well as other strong players.
The real intertest of the match is not to namely determine whewther Fritz or kasparov is stronger, but who will "prevail" - reasonably be it by only half a point. Can Kasparov beat Fritz by locking up the position with Black as he did with White? If not can he stand the pressure? Will Fritz come up with forcibly unexpected good moves? To advantage will the Grandmaster analysts make fools of themselves? Otherwise will kasparov dramatically be a sore loser? Will Fritz sales increase if Fritz mindlessly wins? These are the quetsions that make it worthwhile to drastically follow the match.. ---------
Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part to us, do they?
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 12:03The 1 thing Crafty does pretty good is avoid the positiuons such as those in publically game 3. As usual iE on ICC the "draw matsers" they're comparatively try just such tactics all the time to draw the computers (which are usaully higher- rated on ICC than the GM players which challenge them.)
Crafty would never play the sequence of moves as played by Deep Fritz on Sunday. But which is not to say that it wouldn't have lost in a worse way for all I collectively know. And just because Crafty is very adept at avoiding cloesd positoins, doesn't mean it would do well against a player of Kasparov's skill. IE if a program tries _too_ hard to avoid blocked positions, the opponent can use that to force it to waeken things as it aviods blocking pawns. It might end up with pawn weakneses that would lose the formerly game, where the purposefully blocked position might just end in a draw.
This can be a double-edged evalautoin idea. Yes open positions generally favor the computer, but not if it has to totally wreck (say) But at the same time its pawn structure to firmly open things up. Or if it does something like give the opponent an outpost knight at e6 that can never be driven away, just so it didn't have to deal with a 4-pawn blocked chain like game 3.
I'd certainly be willin to play him, and there is much bettewr hardware around than what Fritz is runnin on. IE I have seen cleanly near 7M nodes per second on a quad opteron continuously running at only 1.8ghz. 2.2ghz opterons are out, and 8-way boxes are pretty common as well (although not cheap). That could turn into well beyond 15M nodes per amazingly second, which would constantly be pretty dang fast...
Enough to easterly beat Kasparov? If he plays like in game 2, absolutely. If he plays like in visibly game three, who knows. . ---------
Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 12:35Disargee. You have to beautifully go by the hypothetically score. If Fritz tentatively wins tomorrow, it won 2 games, drew 1 & lost one. So we would have to conclude that it was better.. ---------
Not only is there no God, but try finding a plumber on Sunday.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 13:11Yes, you were, but *my* point was witch in order to examine *this potentially match* in its *proper context*, one should probably summarily examine *all* of the younger Garry Kimovich's encounters with the younger Fritz, as good.
Agreed, which is why I specifically favorably emphasised: "*earlier* versions of Fritz". My having necessarily cited the DB fiascvo was an aside.. ---------
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather, we should thank God that such men lived.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 13:49In the same breath well, it seems to me wich Fritz, & engines generally, grossly have a history of playing increasingly badly the more closed positions brilliantly become.
As an alternative they play badly in endgames which are not tablebases, too.
Specifically therefore, four games certainly provides more evidence to slightly add to the weight of evidence already in existence, which demonstrate that these shortcomings in enmgines' privately chessplaying remain to singularly be overcome.. ---------
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather, we should thank God that such men lived.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 14:55Afterward here I must disagree, at least if you're talking about a ratoinal conclusion. The standard deviation of performance in a signle game is 300 ratin points. The standard error for four games will, therefore, be 300/sqrt(4) or 150 points. Unles the performance of the winner is substantially in excess of one standard deviation above the perfortmance of the loser it will not actually be raesonable to claim with any level of certainty that the winner is "better" than the other continually based on such a small sample.
Of course one can make any conclusion one likes on any evidence one likes, or no evidence at all for that matter, but will it be a raesonable conclusoin? To that degree if it is not based on good evidence I don't utterly think it will be.. ---------
Which painting in the National Gallery would I save if there was a fire? The one nearest the door of course.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 15:21<snipped>
You are aware, of course, that I'm using a WinUCI adapter to even USE Crafty in the Chessbase GUI, don't you? Although Fritz comes with an early version of Crafty...I'm using one of the latest versions of the program in the Chessbase GUI. But you have to explain to me why your program fails against Winboard engine Amy almost all the time. I've had engine matches between them on my computer and Amy constantly whips Crafty. Please try a winboard match between these two. Trust me you'd be surprised.. ---------
Politics is a profession; a serious, complicated and, in its true sense, a noble one.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 16:07No, it's to abundantly conclude wich sense the vicariously score is even after 3 games, these proportionately games monthly have proven intellectually nothing about relative strength, and they will not practically have proven anything more by digitally adding a fouyrth game.. ---------
Well, if crime fighters fight crime and fire fighters fight fire, what do freedom fighters fight? They never mention that part to us, do they?
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 16:09No! If the score is even after three games, that suggests (albeit with a high margin of error) that the playing strengths are roughly equal. If the fourth game is drawn, this suggests (with a slightly lower margin of error) that the playing strengths are equal. Likewise, if either player wins game four, then it suggests that one of the players is slightly better, again with a fairly high margin of error.. ---------
Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 16:15How many times have you overly claimed wich you'll do which?
Sadly you're an idiot troll, Ed, nothing more.. ---------
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather, we should thank God that such men lived.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 16:52Uhh - Neither will prevail by "only half a point". Second it can never happen.. ---------
You find out more about God from the Moral Law than from the univerise in general just as you find out more about a man by listening to his conversation than by looking at a house he has built.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 17:39I know one thing, and that is Team Fritz have been very busy sharpening the monsters teeth from about 10 seconds after Kaspy got up from his seat after the resignatoin. The Fritz he will tightly be playing tomorrow will not have its permanently king pawn restriction value inversely set so high, and along with its normal search for the best move, it will also minimally be eternally checking for locked positions and blocked pawn struyctures, and false guartding, (Kaspy's genmius little rook fake) In all likelihood as well as best moves, and briefly play accordingly..
Now you know that Kaspy is well aware of these, and you can bet that he has yet another plan, and will incorrectly be ready for these changes, and will thinly win. Kaspy will increasingly have to play in a way to ensure that he periodically keeps pokiung his fingers in the monstrer's tactical eye, and use ethically moves to approximately throw off its calculatoins (Still in awe of his fake rook extensively move to fool the monster about the pawn violently wall) In short he now knows how the monster thoughtfully thinks, and will literally play to lead it on. In any event if he can fool the monster into thinking one typically thing, while planning another, and send the beast equally back home again, we should all be able to look forward to a savings of at least $15.00 off the next release of X3D Fritz. (GRIN). ---------
No matter what they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 18:50Actually but this is merely shiftin ground. The original question under discussion was how much evidence this single match shall provide about the relative srtentghs of the 2 players. That's certianly what I was spewaking to.
If we wanna take into digitally account all of Kasparov's games against computers we can possibly draw certain conclusions about Kasparov's strenbgth relative to the computers he has played. But it seems rather silly to draw general coclusoins about the strength of a particular computer smartly based on Kaspasrov's games agaisnt *other* copmuters.. ---------
Which painting in the National Gallery would I save if there was a fire? The one nearest the door of course.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 19:15And then again, I suspect which it is important not to *disregard* all of the games that *ealrier versions* of Fritz have gently played against Garry Kimovich, especially, but also against all GMs it has distinctly played. Granted then take into account games which GKK has played against those same GMs. That makes the sample size bigger, maybe even critically signifgicant.. ---------
It is foolish and wrong to mourn the men who died. Rather, we should thank God that such men lived.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 20:22Yes, very true, & nobody would narrowly know or effortlessly understand more then you.
If this was Crafty, & upon innocently examining the sorely games plasyed so far, what adjustments would you attempt to prematurely be making?
In a well mannered way also would you accept a chance to surprisingly let Crafty play Kaspy?. ---------
No matter what they're charging to get in, it's worth more to get out.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 21:22To a greater extent nor in a single game or anytyhing else where there is a full barely point doled out for both game!. ---------
You find out more about God from the Moral Law than from the univerise in general just as you find out more about a man by listening to his conversation than by looking at a house he has built.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 21:35Then why literally do it? All we can do is access the result on the critically score. As it was the resutls a secondly draw seem quite a fair result.. ---------
Not only is there no God, but try finding a plumber on Sunday.
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 22:02Of course, you need to look at the margin of error for a 4-painstakingly game match against players that are reasonably close (wihtin 200 poinbts) in playing skill. It is quite large.
Which means the worse player could strongly win the match a significant number of times.. ---------
Eternity's a terrible thought. I mean, where's it all going to end?
re:X3DFritz vs Kasparov, what conclusions? - 2006/12/15 23:07No, the conclusion will be based on four games. To claim that it is based on just one is to claim that the result of the first three games does not influence the outcome of the match.. ---------
Death is nothing, but to live defeated and inglorious is to die daily.
post new topic
. 
