Vlad Dumitrescu wrote:
Hi Matt,
On 1/25/07, Matt Gokey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But just because a rule of thumb holds for Chess doesn't mean it does
for Go. Of course I could be wrong, but I was just trying to introduce
reasonable doubt, since Don always seems so sure of himself ;-)
If I may venture trying to rephrase your arguments, do you mean that
since difficulty grows exponentially there may be a qualitative leap
between chess and go?
Not really. I merely am raising a question about the assertion that
human doubling of thinking time results in _linear_ improvements. I am
not claiming that there is no improvement - never have. I am not
claiming that every turn must produce better results to improve overall
play - never have. However I am trying to explain a rationale for the
possibility that improvements may not be linear based on the nature of Go.
Comparing chess and go is difficult, but I think this effect can be
seen between 9x9 and 19x19 go too: the two games are quite different,
because in 9x9 there is practically no strategic element and this
element brings a whole new dimension to the game.
Yes it is difficult to compare. Don ventured into these waters by
asserting that a relationship fairly well established and reliable in
Chess holds for Go.
As for between 9x9 and 19x19 Go, obviously 19x19 is harder and games are
much more strategically and tactically interesting, but I think a
similar relationship between chess and 9x9 Go probably holds, just
differs by degree.
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
