From newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.claremont.edu!ucivax!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!stgprao Wed Sep 16 21:21:37 EDT 1992
Article 6774 of comp.ai.philosophy:
Newsgroups: comp.ai.philosophy
Path: newshub.ccs.yorku.ca!torn!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!news.claremont.edu!ucivax!news.service.uci.edu!unogate!stgprao
>From: stgprao@st.unocal.COM (Richard Ottolini)
Subject: Re: Checkers master beats computer
Message-ID: <1992Sep3.200000.16300@unocal.com>
Sender: news@unocal.com (Unocal USENET News)
Organization: Unocal Corporation
References: <1992Aug30.195848.6377@unocal.com> <87846@netnews.upenn.edu>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 1992 20:00:00 GMT
Lines: 21

In article <87846@netnews.upenn.edu> weemba@sagi.wistar.upenn.edu (Matthew P Wiener) writes:
>In article <1992Aug30.195848.6377@unocal.com>, stgprao@st (Richard Ottolini) writes:
>>CBS news announced that the world checkers champ beat a computer 4-2 games.
>>I thought checkers was ceded to computers a couple decades ago because
>>those programs are easier to write than chess.
>
>So?  Qubic is perhaps the most complex game currently solved by computer.
>

I was under the impression that because checkers moves and strategies were
simpler to compute than chess, the computer can look ahead so far in the
game and basically win by brute force.  But human mind can still devise
strategies to defeat such a computation which is amazing to me. 

Brute force is the main technique in chess programs (examine a million+ moves
compared to a human looking at a hundred+).
But the possible moves and strategies is larger than checkers, so brute force
cant beat top people yet.

Do you have comparison measure of the complexity of chess versus cubic?
Some people claim GO is more complex than chess too.


