On Mon, 2007-01-22 at 03:43 +0100, alain Baeckeroot wrote:
> The few games i played against mogobot on 19x19 shows that it does not
> "know" overconcentration. And i can safely bet that increasing
> thinking
> time will not solve this,
By definition, a scalable program can solve all problems so
your statement is incorrect.
It's also not necessary to be able to be able to do ALL things as well
as a strong master - it's only necessary that you can do some things
better. Chess programs are better now than humans even though they
are inferior in a lot of ways.
> and computer cannot reach amateur 1d without
> this "concept" (either explicit or implicit in large patterns like
> Mango)
With all due respect, regardless of your computer go strength, I
doubt you (or any of us) really understand what it means to be 1 dan.
I say this because in the old days of computer chess the strongest
masters proved they didn't know what they were talking about when
it came to similar subject matter. They said a lot of really
stupid things about what it took to be a master but their intuition
was embarrassingly naive. Historical perspective is a wonderful
thing!
Strong players are very good at producing strong moves - but they
have no special insight about anything else - even things
peripherally related.
I consider myself a little bit of an expert on this subject because
I have studied it for 2 decades informally. I have exchanged
viewpoints with
a lot of people on this subject too. My old partner Larry Kaufman
was an expert himself on this and was uncanny in his ability to predict
the winner of odds matches and what it would take to equalize, etc.
He almost always won bets with grandmasters, who would play him odds
games but Larry never took a bad bet, he knew how strong he was and
what kind of handicap was required in time-odds games and games with
piece or pawn odds. He is the first one that told
me that weak "postal chess" players played higher quality games that
strong grandmasters because of the time factor. Many other strong
players confirmed this for me. He understood the
relationship between time and strength too. We worked it out
together than humans benefit more from thinking time that computers
do (based on actual data, not unreliable intuition.) He was a games
expert, being the strongest non-Asian Shogi player at the time (maybe
he still is, I don't know) and he was a Go player too, although I
don't know if he achieved anything remarkable in GO. I would be
surprised if he wasn't well into the dan range somewhere however.
- Don
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
