Re: computer-go: relative strengths chess vs go

[Barry Phease <barryp@xxxxxxxx>]

This discussion has been interesting, but I feel is not developing very well.

At 05:36 PM 24/09/00 +0100, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
> If Kramnik has a good position, he'll win from god.
I think you are probably right, but Chess is a deep enough game that the 
possibility exists that human understanding is at a lower level than we 
believe.  I am a very weak chess player but i can still reasonably well 
understand the meaning behind professionals' moves.  However humans cannot 
read deeply enough to really consider all the possible plans.

Anyway whatever we say about human vs god is unprovable.  In Tictactoe or 
perhaps even draughts we can be sure about what perfect play looks like, 
but in more complicated games we are only guessing.  The professionals have 
developed a set of heuristics that work pretty well against other humans.

> Will a professional go player *ever* lose when he starts with 9
> stones up and playing for his life?
The basic answer is that we don't know.  However it seems unlikely.

> ratings in chess don't compare very well to GO. Apart from that
> there are many ratings in chess too.
Ratings in go vary dramatically according to the ability of the players too.

> In a post on the rating list one says 100 rating points are worth
> a stone.
This is a very rough approximation and certainly doesn't apply among 
professionals.  It might be true that 100 rating points correspond to one 
rank difference, but about 3-4 rank differences make up one stone among 
professionals.

> If mr. sugimoto with 2030 plays Kasparov who has:
>
>  4100018  Kasparov, Gary                  g  RUS  2849   35  13.04.63
>
> So if 100 points would be 1 stone, then Kasparov would play with 8 stones
> behind against any 2049- rated person on the above list.
As above  If Kasparov is 9 dan then Sugimoto would be about 1 dan and would 
need about 3 stones handicap (which seems about right).


> Kasparov is 9 dan professional, Kramnik too.
> Then big gap and a lot of 8 dans on the list.
I guess you could relate Chess pro grades to go by saying that Kasparov is 
9 dan,  The weakest GM would be about 5 dan, and The weakest IM would be 
about 1 dan professionals.

If a pro 9 dan plays a pro 5 dan then the 9 dan wins more than 90%.  2 
stones handicap tips the balance slightly in black's favour.

A 1 dan beats a 9 dan about 1 game per decade.  The difference in handicap 
stones is about 3.

We can assume that the top Chess players and the top Go players are 
approximately equal in how good they are at the game.  It doesn't follow 
that they are equally close to perfect play.

Barry Phease

mailto:barryp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.es.co.nz/~barryp