[computer-go] Tesuji

[David Fotland]

> 
> Who has the best Go programs at 19x19 level?   I think David 
> Fotland is
> only 2 Dan and his is one of the best.   I know the old 
> handtalk program
> was written by a very strong player.   How strong is Michael Reiss?
> And the other top guys? 

The programs that reached the top quickly were all written by strong
players.

Nemesis - Bruce Wilcox - 5 Dan
Goliath - Mark Boon - 6 Dan
Handtank - Chen Zhixing - 6 Dan
Go Intellect - Ken Chen - 6 Dan

I was improving from 4 kyu to 1 dan while I was writing most of Many Faces,
and
It typically finished 3rd or 4th.

Michael Reiss was about 1 Kyu or 1 Dan.  His program became very strong
against other programs
over a long period of time with a lot of tuning against those programs.

So I'd say that programmer go strength gives a small edge, enough to push
the program from strong to best.

I agree with Don that most important thing is the ability to turn your
unconscious go knowledge into
explicit knowledge that you can articulate.  

David

> 
> I'm not an expert on this but I would just guess that it's a 
> bit more important in GO to be strong than in games like chess.  
> 
> 
> - Don
> 
> 
> On Tue, 2007-09-11 at 07:41 +0200, Russ Williams wrote:
> > On 9/11/07, Joshua Shriver <jshriver at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Was reading a page about Go and came across this term.  
> Anyone know 
> > > what it means?
> > 
> > With no disrespect intended, it seems like there are a fair 
> number of 
> > go programmers who don't actually know go very much beyond 
> the rules 
> > themselves.  (I'm assuming from your question that you fall 
> into this
> > category.)
> > 
> > So I'm curious why non-go-players (or minimal-go-players) are 
> > interested in programming go, instead of a game they know well.  Is 
> > there a similar situation in chess (are there a lot of chess 
> > programmers who don't really know chess)?  Hmm, maybe so.
> > 
> > I also wonder whether experienced go programmers believe 
> one needs to 
> > know go to be able to make a very strong go program.  Or 
> will some of 
> > the new Monte Carlo etc techniques sufficiently supplant 
> expert domain 
> > knowledge that any good programmer with just a rudimentary 
> knowledge 
> > of the rules of go will be able to make a strong go program?
> > 
> > cheers,
> > russ
> > _______________________________________________
> > computer-go mailing list
> > computer-go at computer-go.org 
> > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> computer-go mailing list
> computer-go at computer-go.org 
> http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
>