Re: XieXie Master -- a recommendation

On Mar 7, 10:50=A0pm, mark <mschr...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Mar 6, 8:43 am, mikeh...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>
> The computer was not an octal. The computer was a Dual Intel Core 2 Duo
51=
60. Seewww.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3D3504 The rule is double
the=
 speed the program improves 75 points in games of 40 moves/120 minutes.
For =
blitz games doubling the speed increases much more than 75 > points.

i stand corrected.  i must've gotten this match's hardware setup mixed
up w/ kramnik's previous duel w/ fritz (the brains in bahrain match).
i think that fritz was running on an octal system (monster hardware at
that time).

> Watanabe never said that. I read the translated comments of Watanabe.
Wata=
nabe said "The variations are long, but a strong player will spot this
repea=
t attack theme immediately. In this position, almost anything is good as
lon=
g as White doesn't give Black a knight. The computer, on the other hand, >
h=
as to consider all the possibilities over a wide range, which might make
it =
difficult for it to focus on the key point and probe it deeply. In this
resp=
ect, human experience still seems to be superior."

interesting.  i only have the wiki article to go by, and since u're
basically saying the wiki article is basically totally wrong, i'll
have to take your word for it.

> That's not a quote from Watanabe. Watanabe said, "they are getting to be
a=
 match for professionals" not top pro level.

apparently another false claim from wiki.  thx.

> The wikipedia article made another mistake. The article says the
computer =
has an "awesome endgame ability". Watanabe said the opposite "I learned
from=
 this game is that endgame technique apart from tsumi is still a challenge
f=
or the computer."

looks like they hit the trifecta!  lol.

> This wikipedia paragraph in the shogi article exaggerates the strength
of =
computer shogi.

curious, what kinda hardware was the program running on?

> The Bonanza Watanabe game was a mismatch. Before you play a top
profession=
al you should be qualified by winning a game against a weak professional.
No=
 computer has ever won against any professional. The best way to see how
str=
ong the computer is by playing in human
> tournaments. Until the computer beats a professional we can not say the
co=
mputer has reached professional level.

the wiki article said the japanese shogi association (or whatever it's
called), put out a memo strongly encouraging shogi pros to never play
against programs.  is this true/false?  also, what is the rating of
the world's #1 shogi player?  do they use the elo system as well?  and
what is the rating of a "weak professional?"  is it the case that
bonanza cant even beat the "weakest professional that exists?"

> Take Othello, it is simpler than xiang qi.

no, it's not.  state-space size is a poor metric of game difficulty.
or rather, u can also say othello is difficult for humans, but not for
computers.

> What about the draw odds handicap match played by Rybka? Rybka played an
8=
 game match with GM Joel Benjamin at Draw Odds. Every draw for Benjamin
coun=
ts as a point. For GM Benjamin no difference between a win and a draw. All
h=
e needed was 5 draws to win the match. And
> Benjamin has white in all games. Rybka won 6 games and drew 2 games so
Ryb=
ka won.

1. benjamin aint 2750 elo.
2. the prize fund was not significant.
3. he didnt spend considerable time sparring to be the "ultimate draw
master."