There is a claim that humans earns more from time then computers.
I wonder if there is an evidence for it not when you compare blitz and bullet but when you compare time control of 10+10 to time control of 60+60
I think that it may be possible to test it by making programs artificially 1000 times slower so humans have chances against them and finding if computers do better at 10+10 relative to 60+60 against the same humans.
I think that what happened in the past may be misleading because programs of today earn more from time(when they start with the same playing strength) thanks to better algorithms.
human computers and the time factor
Moderator: Ras
-
- Posts: 10787
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
- Location: Tel-Aviv Israel
-
- Posts: 3026
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: human computers and the time factor
I don't know about "evidence" inasmuch as scientific tests, but really it seems obvious. Note I am not talking about human vs. engine results specifically, though they translate. There are players, and a number, who are proportionately stronger against other humans at faster time controls compared to their slower play, but overall there are more players (purely empirical evidence) who are stronger at slower TCs than fast. For me the drawing line is g/20 compared to a 4-6h game.Uri Blass wrote:There is a claim that humans earns more from time then computers.
I wonder if there is an evidence for it not when you compare blitz and bullet but when you compare time control of 10+10 to time control of 60+60
I think that it may be possible to test it by making programs artificially 1000 times slower so humans have chances against them and finding if computers do better at 10+10 relative to 60+60 against the same humans.
I think that what happened in the past may be misleading because programs of today earn more from time(when they start with the same playing strength) thanks to better algorithms.
I suspect that it is related to the way players use the extra time, particularly stronger players. positional analysis, doing a checklist of the features, crunching lines, selecting candidate moves in a more orderly fashion, etc. Blitz is more "grab what you can", and of course time exploitation, which is a very minor factor in long TCs. It is also the reason why growing players are advised to avoid blitz play, or much blitz play, as this will inhibit the growth of other aspects of play that they can only develop in slow games. Slow games for a strong human are NOT just blitz play times 10.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."