|
||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||
|
Chessville
Advertise to Single insert:
|
How To Fool Fritz - Explorations in Man Assisted Machine Chess (MAMS) Reviewed by Dr. Steven B. Dowd
This title has also been reviewed by Prof. Andy
Walker,
Alberts is an idiosyncratic author, which should not be confused with “bad.” He writes about chess computers not from the view of one who knows about computers (I still wonder if I read correctly that all his analysis was done on a computer that he found in a trash heap!), but one who loves chess. Those who have attended college probably had at least one such idiosyncratic professor – a guy who was, for lack of a better term, a bit “nutty” but who had such interesting ideas that you could not help but enjoy the class. I am also reminded, for some reason, of the book Cosmic Consciousness, by Maurice Bucke, a very popular book for those of my age. Bucke theorized, and illustrated only with anecdotal examples, those he felt had attained a higher level of consciousness about the cosmos – not only Buddha and Jesus, but also Lincoln and Whitman were amongst his examples! It was the author’s enthusiasm for his idea of a higher consciousness that made the book popular – and I see Alberts book in the same light. His enthusiasm for his topic is infectious, and he is so human in his pursuit of truth – a perfect adjunct for a computer – or vice-versa! You’ll search in vain for exact descriptions of how Alberts fooled “Fritz” – a generic name he uses for all computer chess playing programs, and careful reading shows he probably worked on some of these continuations for long periods of time – and used Fritz to fool itself (and then the subtitle of Man Assisted Machine Chess makes much more sense!) What kind of anecdotes? Here is a short quote I find amusing, in discussing the Ruy Lopez Exchange and how to best play it:
During the analysis such anecdotes often pop up, showing a totally human face behind the computer. Those who expect a large dose of computer theory will be disappointed – to Alberts the chess computer is almost a sort of magic box, and has – the idea that attracted me the most – the potential to turn us all into chess composers – and not in the strict problem sense, but rather in using the computer as a creative tool, not as something that tells us what is right or wrong – surely that’s one more step into the Matrix, or? Chris Feather, the British helpmate king, who taught me much about problem chess, once said to me that the computer was a “great slave and terrible master.” And this is precisely how I see many of our great GMs using computers in their chess – they are a slave to the evaluations of Fritz. The accuracy of computers should be used to test the strength of their ideas – but instead I fear many players let the computer set the direction for both idea and accuracy. Is this one reason why modern chess is often seen as less exciting? The examples Alberts uses come mostly again from my generation – Fischer, Botvinnik, etc… but modern openings and evaluations are seen as well, especially those players who play uncompromising chess – Polgar, Sokolov, and more - a welcome facet of Albert’s MAMS philosophy. The explorations Alberts has done in playing are fun. I played through them, and it is indeed neat to think that amateurs such as us can beat the mighty computers that beat up on the modern day GMs by playing aggressive, rather than the passive chess we used to play to beat computers. This – in a word – is fun! Their accuracy may be suspect with new analysis, but Alberts has learned from the computer – instead of expecting it to teach him. He is no tabula rasa, but someone who will interact with, and challenge, the computer’s evaluations. There are disappointments in the book, but then again, this is a most human book, written by humans for humans. Nothing is dry and unengaging here. My greatest disappointment came in my specialty – problem chess. Alberts concludes that computers have made it much harder, in endgame composition, to come up with something fantastic. That conclusion is totally false. Computers have made it easier for composers to express fantastic ideas precisely because they bust bad problems quickly and show those things we easily miss. They allow us to engage in flights of fancy, exactly as Alberts does in his openings and middlegames, to see what might work and what fails – and the evaluation is always steady, and based on things we humans might miss.
I enjoy all kinds of problems, but endgame studies – with their connection to the practical game – are a particular favorite. This is a romantic study, as compared to a practical study- where the fantastic is emphasized. Imagine a composer trying to come up with the idea I have for this study – which begins obviously with a perpetual check, but how do we force it? Only one promotion type will check, but which pawn does it – and how and why? Without a computer as my “slave” I probably would have taken years to prepare this proto-study (like many of my studies, I am not sure I am done with it – another advantage of the computer, where sidelines are easily added and subtracted, and cooks eliminated). But here I can test ideas quickly – making the fantastic possible.
In summary, I like this book, and am very happy that more MAMS books are
planned – they will make a welcome addition to the literature on computer
chess. The book has a number of irritating typographical errors and peculiar
use of language (i.e., we would think that someone who keeps referring to
his “castle” when he means his castled position on the king or queenside
something of a duffer). I am very familiar with all kinds of International
notation, but such errors as Pge2 – instead of Nge2, using the Dutch P for Pfaard instead of N for Knight – would probably confuse and irritate a few
readers. However, the publisher has also indicated that these small errors
will be removed from the book in future printings – a nice touch in a world
where errors in chess books often persist for decades. You’ll learn
something from this book, not just about computers, but about chess and
chessplayers – and isn’t that what it is all about? Having fun with chess is
what it is all about – and on this level, Alberts succeeds with flying
colors.
|
The
|
||||||||
|
||||||||||
