If you believe their is a difference state why.
What is your evidence or at least motive for believing what you do?
Do you think that Chess matches against Computers are Different than Matches against Humans?
No.
With computer's opening book it might be, say 2500 in the opening but 1500 in the endgame. (Roughly, cutting out middlegame and not clear where line is, but you know what I mean.:))
A human might be 1900 in the opening but 2100 in the end game.
it depends if how experienced the "human" is and the computer could beat you if your not that experienced
Do you think that Chess matches against Computers are Different than Matches against Humans?
I do see a difference.
Computers usually play one opening or one defense for each of yours. They only have one response to your moves programmed into them, whereas a human will mix it up. If you play a computer twice, you'll be able to play the same game and defeat the computer the same way, but that is not true against humans.
Yes, a computer might be able to stop a move you are trying to make, while a person might miss it. Also you will probably spend a longer time playing with a person since both of you will have to think of what move to make next.Do you think that Chess matches against Computers are Different than Matches against Humans?
Hello;
I am going to answer your question by talking about the "human" aspect of chess.
If you were to play against a person on a regular basis you would both start to understand each other's styles ... this is normal and it is to some extent unconscious. The stronger player will learn to play better against this particular player.
At first this might not seem like a big deal, but in match play it is important ... there are people who say that Dr. Max Euwe was the greatest world champion because he could vary his style of play against other players.
Consider a computer that plays at 2000 but then is programed to play gambits. Against a player that doesn't like gambits this computer would have an advantage. Conversely A computer that plays at 2000 and plays quiet openings might be very tough against a player who is aggressive.
Many of your chess programs have style settings.
Generally a player that can consistently beat a computer at the 2000 rating is probably capable of consistently beating a player rated at 2000. My reasoning is that the human player will learn the style needed to win against the human.
I think that the bottom line is that the human can improve his play while the computer is going to follow its programming regardless of who it is playing.
Of course all this is just my opinion -- it would make an interesting discussion on Chessgames.com.
http://www.chessgames.com
Gens Un Sum
Bill
Yes very different.
Humans are weak %26amp; inferior!
Computers don't get tired, distracted, and don't miss a tactic. With an opening book, they can play openings without a flaw.
50-50 chance, on icc i can beat a computer rated 2200 100 points above my rating, and maybe it will murder me if i dont play my best. See a computer will never get tired and i will so i may lose but when i play my best i can achieve some power greater than my opponents.
No comments:
Post a Comment