spacious_mind wrote:[quote="Terry McCracken
For the reason above, no handicaps, no odds of anykind.
Best,
Terry
A very short response, which still leaves me confused. So you are saying that the Human and ALL Chess Engines (human code) should be handicapped and defer to the unlimited power of the processer. Because it would be unfair to handicap the processor?
So really in our hobby/sport Intel or AMD are the truly best chess players? That blows my theory and suspicion that an engine (any engine) reputed to be the best in the world would show at its best a max 150-200 Elo improvement as a software compared to for example the Spracklen Software of 1989 inside a V10 (<---- For Steve
) if ran at the same speed
No wonder few GM's even bother to play computer matches, the only incentive to even consider a match would be the lure of money provided by the Software Company who benefits through the increased Sales of their software. Does the Engine programmer really get that warm fuzzy feeling in his claim that he is the best in the World when all he has to be able to justify that claim is the power of Intel?
Every sport changes its rules from time to time to adapt to modern times and avoid unfair play, in baseball the composition of the bat or the ball becomes part of the rules as just one example.
But you are saying that unfair play should always be allowed and the third party to the game (baseball bat manufacturer) has the right to influence the result?
Interesting but way off the mark and a sad state for the human game of chess.[/quote]
The progress in software from 1990 is clearly more than 150-200 elo and it is easy to show it.
One game when old software from 1990 could draw against toga proves nothing and I guess it is going to lose more than 90 out of 100 games.
Even if we go back only to 1994 then
The leading program in 1994 was Genius3
Genius7 that has similiar playing strength to Genius3 has only CEGT
rating of 2441
292 Genius 7 2441 32 32 313 42.2 % 2496 31.9 %
For comparison we have on the same hardware.
11 Rybka 2.3.2a w32 1CPU 2976 16 15 1371 71.8 % 2814 34.6 %
68 Toga II 1.2.1a 2800 8 8 5183 53.0 % 2779 35.6 %
You can claim that the difference may be smaller on slower hardware
but programs from 1990 are clearly weaker than Genius so I think that the total difference between toga and the Spracklen Software of 1989 is more than 400 elo if they use the same hardware regardless of the hardware that is used.
Note that part of the software improvement is more efficient search so of course with more time the improvement is bigger but I cannot imagine possible hardware when the difference at tournament time control is less than 400 elo.
Uri