New article on computers attempting to solve checkers

[rich beckwith]

Article spotted by a co-worker....Of course, they had to compare to chess.

http://intelligentlifemagazine.com/inte ... /game-over

[neilwenberg]

Richard, an interesting article even for a poor checker player like me!

[George Hay]

Rich, this is a thought provoking article! IMHO, it is not Dr. Schaeffer vs the Checkerists, but rather Dr Schaeffer is a Checkerist! Also, human creativity is not stifled by checkers being "solved" by a computer, as can be seen by 24 Checkers composing contests and counting! The story of solving the 100 years problem is given in the revised edition of One Jump Ahead pages 443-444, but the diagram on page 443 is incorrect! The solution is not given, but Schaeffer and Don Lafferty went over it and determined what a human would consider "wasting time" is actually the solution! It was the brute-force calculation of the Chinook computer program that solved it. What started out as a simple win ultimately proves to be a very intricate draw! The incredible history and solution of The 100 Years Problem is given towards the bottom of this page from Al Lyman's http://www.checkerworld.com as the last of A famous trio:

http://www.checkerworld.com/famplayers2.html

As for chess being solved, my guess is it will be solved sooner rather than later!

--George Hay

[Richard Pask]

I sent a detailed response to the editor the other day, and received a polite reply in which he described my letter as 'fascinating'. I'll let you know if there are any developments.

The key point is that even when a perfect program is developed - we're certainly not there yet! - it will not prevent human beings from continuing to play and enjoy the game. In this respect, the article was far too gloomy, and didn't reflect the view of the overwhelming majority of players who are only too happy to have a strong program to practise against and work with.

[liam stephens]

By the way, who was Mr. Sturge ?, I wonder !

[George Hay]

Liam, that is very good attention to detail, as J. Sturge's should of been written as J. Struges' or perhaps J. Sturges's at the beginning of the Game Over article. Joshua Sturges was an English author, and one of the strongest checkers/draughts players of his day. Sturges' Guide to the game of Draughts was published in 1800, and Strurges' Critical Situations in the Game of Draughts was published in 1808. Joshua Sturges was 55 years old when he died in 1813. Later generations have acknowledged J. Sturges' influence and reprinted his work in various editions and updates.

--George Hay

[jaguar72]

Dr. Beckwith and all,

While doing nothing to resolve the "Is checkers really 'solved'?" debate, this quote from an article,The Secret Handshake by chess GM Andy Soltis that appeared in the January 2016 issue of Chess Life magazine is, perhaps, germane for a couple of reasons. The main thrust of the article was the connection between playing strength and a player's title and it really did not concern checkers except for the following paragraph:

Chess champs are not the only ones who have terminology issues. The legendary checkers player Maurice (sic) Tinsley resigned his title as world champion when the game's major organizations refused to sanction a world title match in 1992 between him and a computer program, Chinook. So, Tinsley took on Chinook in a non-title "Man Versus Machine World Checker Championship" and won. (Chinook got its revenge by "solving" checkers in 2007.)

I would rather hope that GM Soltis, who is an outstanding chess writer and player, took more time with the rest of the article than he did in researching Dr. Tinsley's first name; however, note that he put quotation marks around "solved". So that rather begs the question of what his views are on the entire "solved" issue. It would be interesting to know.

Perhaps we ought to send him an email and ask him... .

There you have it...just a thought.

Regards to all,

Jaguar72

BTW, GM Soltis's 2003 book, Bobby Fischer Rediscovered, is a really excellent read for those with an interest in the eleventh world champion and his games. Yeah, Fischer's last years were quite horrible and, in some cases, unforgiveable but you can't help but admire, even with some reservations, what went before... .

J72