14672 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
I was just curious if anyone has any idea...
How would the strongest chess engines (like Deep Rybka or Stockfish) perform against super-GMs rated 2750+ if they were limited to lines "only" 25-ply ahead under standard time controls and no opening book or Nalimov table? How about 60-ply? How about each of the above but with an opening book and Nalimov table access? At what point are most of these matches in favor of the engine, the GM, or mostly draws? I have heard that rating an engine "2800" is different than for a human.
a 2700++ GM could crush ANY engine if you take away the opening book IMO. but who knows it might be a good match.
The point is computers have a very very low rate of inaccuracy compared to humans. So while they wouldn't always find the best moves (even after the opening) the human opponent will make enough small errors during the course of the game to fall into a worse position.
Not that the computer would win 100% of the games, but a very strong engine would beat a 2750+ player in a match every time. They already have matches where odds of a pawn and move were given and the computer won (Rybka3) and today's engines are even a bit stronger. Playing without opening book and Nalimov aren't nearly as bad a handicap.
Computers don't calculate to 60 ply anyway. If they did it would be too unreliable in all but the most forceing variations.
On unofficial rating lists, Deep Rybka is ranked @ ~3000, which is much stronger than any human player.
Yes, but I thought it was a "different" type of rating that applied to computers and doesn't translate into a "human" strength, though it would seem to (much like Tactics Trainer and Chess Mentor don't correspond to rating strength but they use a similar system that makes it look so). I'll have to find where I read that or maybe someone else can clear up the confusion.
Now why do computers get destroyed without an opening book? I am guessing it is because programmers have a hard time in evaluating the values of certain early moves and positions?
What if a computer is forced to play an "inferior" opening (like Blackmar-Diebert Gambit), will they still eventually turn the tables and crush the super-GM?
engine vs 2750+
not worth comparison
Depends also if the human aims for a draw or for a win
what is this whole "carlsen plays like a computer" nonsense
by socialista a few minutes ago
Drawing a 2700 GM...as black!
by Sangwin 3 minutes ago
Breaking the 1600 barrier (first Danish Gambit)
by BMeck 5 minutes ago
Is this a draw?
by Martin0 5 minutes ago
What are "match points" and "board points"?
by tigerprowl 6 minutes ago
Carlsen Supplies New Evidence That Chess Is A Draw With No Mistakes
by nameno1had 6 minutes ago
A Classic Alekhine win
by yeres30 7 minutes ago
Can Anyone Become Grandmaster?
by TheGrobe 8 minutes ago
Help needed about problems with Chrome on Samsung Galaxy !
by epoqueepique 8 minutes ago
12/5/2013 - Too Many Attackers, Too Little Defenders
by biat 10 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2013 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!