King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does

Moderator: Ras
April Fool's A bit late.Daniel Shawul wrote:http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047
King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does
Sadly this doesn't seem to be a joke...Terry McCracken wrote:April Fool's A bit late.Daniel Shawul wrote:http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047
King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does
I'm embarrassed for Chessbase.Daniel Shawul wrote:http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047
King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does
Depends on the place.Terry McCracken wrote:April Fool's A bit late.Daniel Shawul wrote:http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047
King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does
Solved is the wrong word. Maybe the best move the computer could come up with is more like it.Daniel Shawul wrote:http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047
King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does
I don't understand that part of the article... Look at this:Daniel Shawul wrote:Nope. 3000 cores IBM cluster working on it for 4 months where all positions with +5.12 are discarded. With an assumption that those are practically won with more than 5-sigma (margin for a discovery I think). Quite an achievement IMO!
If the probability of a 5.12 score being a win is 99.99999999%, shouldn't the full calculation (which surely involves a huge amount of >=5.12 scores) have a much smaller probabilty of being correct? And yet he claims the same probability?but if Rybka is displaying +5.12 or more the outcome is 99.99999999% secure. That is approximately the confidence number we give to our King's Gambit results: 99.99999999%.