Anand on chess as a profession and on computers

[Terry McCracken]

Did you come here just to insult some of our members? Over a period of time a great many or our programmers have had changes of mind as programs got really strong and that includes Dr. Hyatt.
Bill

That's true and I as well but not in 1997 or 2000, a decade later yes.

[mschribr]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

[bigo]

Did you come here just to insult some of our members? Over a period of time a great many or our programmers have had changes of mind as programs got really strong and that includes Dr. Hyatt.


Hi Bill

You see it as an insult, but I see it as just telling the truth, I think Dr Hyatt has been around long enough and has a thicker skin then most, I doubt he was offended by my comment. I might be deranged but honestly i see this as the truth. The reason I mentioned Hyatt is because he is the most vocal and prominent opponent of the issue.

[bigo]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

You must comment on what I actually said, which was that computer were stronger then MOST HUMANS not all humans, I was just trying to establish that in 2000 computers were well over 2000, at this time Hyaat was claiming computers were only 2400 which is completely adsurd if not Moronic!

[Terry McCracken]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

You must comment on what I actually said, which was that computer were stronger then MOST HUMANS not all humans, I was just trying to establish that in 2000 computers were well over 2000, at this time Hyaat was claiming computers were only 2400 which is completely adsurd if not Moronic!

Only for PCs not Deeper Blue. It was probably ~2600 DB, but Kaspy was Psyched.

P.S. He could have won in 03 but was too nervous.

[M ANSARI]

I think we have reached a point where the strongest human GM would be very happy to have even one win in a match against even average hardware of today. A Quadcore Rybka 3 on XP 64bit would be a formidable opponent to Anand, Kasparov, Kramnik, Topalov ... or any other top GM. Kramnik, who has a style most suited for chess against a computer, could not beat a much older Deep Fritz on much weaker hardware. I would guess that a Rybka 3 on a fast Quad today would be several hundred ELO points stronger. I won't even contemplate what would happen on a fast Octa system that can be had for around $2000. Pretty soon a win by a GM against a PPC machine will be a big deal.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

You must comment on what I actually said, which was that computer were stronger then MOST HUMANS not all humans, I was just trying to establish that in 2000 computers were well over 2000, at this time Hyaat was claiming computers were only 2400 which is completely adsurd if not Moronic!

Only for PCs not Deeper Blue. It was probably ~2600 DB, but Kaspy was Psyched.

P.S. He could have won in 03 but was too nervous.

Kasparov is my all timer best chess player and I agree that there was a psychological issue involved then....
Dr.D

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I think we have reached a point where the strongest human GM would be very happy to have even one win in a match against even average hardware of today. A Quadcore Rybka 3 on XP 64bit would be a formidable opponent to Anand, Kasparov, Kramnik, Topalov ... or any other top GM. Kramnik, who has a style most suited for chess against a computer, could not beat a much older Deep Fritz on much weaker hardware. I would guess that a Rybka 3 on a fast Quad today would be several hundred ELO points stronger. I won't even contemplate what would happen on a fast Octa system that can be had for around $2000. Pretty soon a win by a GM against a PPC machine will be a big deal.

I know what would happen Majd,do you want to tell you

[mschribr]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

You must comment on what I actually said, which was that computer were stronger then MOST HUMANS not all humans, I was just trying to establish that in 2000 computers were well over 2000, at this time Hyaat was claiming computers were only 2400 which is completely adsurd if not Moronic!

I thought you said the best computer could beat the world champion in 2000. I agree in 2000 that the best computer was 2700. In 2000 Junior played in the Dortmund tournament and performed at 2702.

[mschribr]

I think it was evident since 2000 Computers were stronger then most humans, ...

It was not evident in 2000 that computers were stronger than humans because in 2002 Kramnik played fritz and did not win. In 2003 Kasparov played Junior and did not win. Again in 2003 Kasparov played Fritz and did not win. It was only in 2006 that Fritz beat Kramnik. So in 2000 computers were still not stronger than humans.

You must comment on what I actually said, which was that computer were stronger then MOST HUMANS not all humans, I was just trying to establish that in 2000 computers were well over 2000, at this time Hyaat was claiming computers were only 2400 which is completely adsurd if not Moronic!

Only for PCs not Deeper Blue. It was probably ~2600 DB, but Kaspy was Psyched.

P.S. He could have won in 03 but was too nervous.

In 1997 Kasparov was psyched. Agreed. But in 2003 Kasparov was nervous? You can not say that every time someone plays a computer he has a condition that does not let him play at his best. In 2003 Kasparov played twice and each time drew. Kramnik also drew in 2002. That means the computer was playing at world champion level chess, 2830, in 2003.