Armando Great outplayed Deep Fritz 11 in Playchess

[Uri]

Armando Great outplayed Deep Fritz 11 yesterday in Playchess. Deep Fritz simply pushed his kingside pawns, weakening them and in the end lost them. So in the end Armando Great got 4 connected passed pawns.

Here's the game:

[Event "3m + 1s, rated"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2009.04.24"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Comp Fritz, Deep Fritz 11"]
[Black "Armando Great"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D11"]
[WhiteElo "3333"]
[BlackElo "3217"]
[PlyCount "90"]
[EventDate "2009.04.24"]
[EventType "blitz"]

1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 c6 4. e3 Bg4 5. h3 Bh5 6. Nc3 e6 7. g4 Bg6 8. Ne5 Nbd7 9. Nxg6 hxg6 10. Bd3 Bd6 11. c5 Bc7 12. Bd2 e5 13. Qb3 b5 14. g5 Nh5 15. a4 exd4 16. exd4 b4 17. Ne2 a5 18. O-O-O O-O 19. f4 Re8 20. Rhf1 Nf8 21. h4 Qd7 22. f5 Rxe2 23. Bxe2 Ng3 24. Qd3 gxf5 25. Rfe1 Ne4 26. h5 Re8 27. h6 g6 28. Bf3 Ne6 29. b3 Kh7 30. Bxe4 dxe4 31. Qc4 Rd8 32. Kb1 Qxd4 33. Qxd4 Rxd4 34. Bc1 Be5 35. Rf1 Rxd1 36. Rxd1 f4 37. Rd7 Nxg5 38. Re7 Bf6 39. Rc7 e3 40. Kc2 e2 41. Bd2 f3 42. Kd3 Bc3 43. Re7 Bxd2 44. Kxd2 Kxh6 45. Ke1 Ne6 Comp Fritz,Deep Fritz 11 gibt auf (Lag: Av=0.45s, max=2.9s) 0-1

Some say he used Rybka but I doubt it because some of his moves in the game were clearly human moves which no computer currently plays. Armando Great is clearly one of the best chess players, definitely on the level of Vugar Gashimov and Raffael who also play there sometimes.

I believe computers need to be at least 1000 times faster and software more intelligent to even match the best human players. This just proves that the best chess humans are still better and will outplay the computer most of the times. I believe computers will one day equal the best chess humans but they will never be better. Human will always be one level higher than computer in some way.

Even I and I am a weak player could get a good position against Rybka in the Ruy Lopez (C65). Rybka had a pinned knight on f6 and played the weakening move g5. From there I got a better position but didn't play on.

[Matthias Gemuh]

I believe computers need to be at least 1000 times faster and software more intelligent to even match the best human players. This just proves that the best chess humans are still better and will outplay the computer most of the times. I believe computers will one day equal the best chess humans but they will never be better. Human will always be one level higher than computer in some way.

Even I and I am a weak player could get a good position against Rybka in the Ruy Lopez (C65). Rybka had a pinned knight on f6 and played the weakening move g5. From there I got a better position but didn't play on.

If you had played on, you would have won that game and the next, and the next, etc.

[Cubeman]

Where were all these 3200 rated players 8 years ago? Human evolution must be rapid to produce increase in intelligence and strenght in such a short time.

[Uri Blass]

<snipped>

I believe computers need to be at least 1000 times faster and software more intelligent to even match the best human players. This just proves that the best chess humans are still better and will outplay the computer most of the times. I believe computers will one day equal the best chess humans but they will never be better. Human will always be one level higher than computer in some way.

1)Armando's elo is 3217 and Deep Fritz11's elo is 3333 based on your pgn.
I fail to see the proof that the best chess humans will outplay the computer most of the times when Armando even fails to get higher elo
than Deep fritz11 that is clearly weaker than Rybka3.

2)I see no basis to your opinion that computers will never be better than humans when the evidence is that they are already better than humans.

Uri

[Uri]

I see no basis to your opinion that computers will never be better than humans when the evidence is that they are already better than humans.

Uri

If computers are really stronger than humans in chess then how is it that Great Armando, Oligarckh, Hikaru Nakamura and even the young Tamir Nabaty managed to win games against Deep Fritz 11 and Rybka 3?

It's hard for me to believe that the computer is better than human. Evidence suggests that a strong GM is clearly better in strategical battles while the computer can outplay the GM in open games with a lot of tactical shots. Ani Khanamiryan faced Deep Fritz 11 in Playchess and basically lost all the games and draw two or three after closing the position. And Ani Khanamiryan is not a GM, so take note that a GM could probably do much better.

The best way to know for certain which one is really better is to let Deep Fritz 11 or Rybka 3 play some of the Top 100 GMs in FIDE, in matches of 10 games or so for each Grandmaster.

[Laskos]

I see no basis to your opinion that computers will never be better than humans when the evidence is that they are already better than humans.

Uri

If computers are really stronger than humans in chess then how is it that Great Armando, Oligarckh, Hikaru Nakamura and even the young Tamir Nabaty managed to win games against Deep Fritz 11 and Rybka 3?

It's hard for me to believe that the computer is better than human. Evidence suggests that human is clearly better in strategical battles while the computer can outplay the GM in open games with a lot of tactical shots. Ani Khanamiryan faced Deep Fritz 11 pn Playchess and basically lost all the games and draw two or three after closing the position. And Ani Khanamiryan is not a GM, so take note that a GM could probably do much better.

The best way to know for certain which one is really better is to let Deep Fritz 11 or Rybka 3 play some of the Top 100 GMs in FIDE, in matches of 10 games or so for each Grandmaster.

Kramnik lost, Nakamura is usually losing, what do you want more? In the future it will be more interesting to see computer assisted GM's dealing with Rybka. Without computer assistance humans have no chance. I don't really know where from your optimism came from.

Kai

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I see no basis to your opinion that computers will never be better than humans when the evidence is that they are already better than humans.

Uri

If computers are really stronger than humans in chess then how is it that Great Armando, Oligarckh, Hikaru Nakamura and even the young Tamir Nabaty managed to win games against Deep Fritz 11 and Rybka 3?

It's hard for me to believe that the computer is better than human. Evidence suggests that human is clearly better in strategical battles while the computer can outplay the GM in open games with a lot of tactical shots. Ani Khanamiryan faced Deep Fritz 11 pn Playchess and basically lost all the games and draw two or three after closing the position. And Ani Khanamiryan is not a GM, so take note that a GM could probably do much better.

The best way to know for certain which one is really better is to let Deep Fritz 11 or Rybka 3 play some of the Top 100 GMs in FIDE, in matches of 10 games or so for each Grandmaster.

Kramnik lost, Nakamura is usually losing, what do you want more? In the future it will be more interesting to see computer assisted GM's dealing with Rybka. Without computer assistance humans have no chance. I don't really know where from your optimism came from.
Kai

I also wonder where his optimism comes from....all these chess engines wiping the ground with the top rated human players and he still claims that the human are better....as far as I ma concerned the latest matches between humans and Rybka are the so called stupid odd matches and this is not chess,it's something else
Dr.D

[Matthias Gemuh]

I believe computers need to be at least 1000 times faster and software more intelligent to even match the best human players. This just proves that the best chess humans are still better and will outplay the computer most of the times. I believe computers will one day equal the best chess humans but they will never be better. Human will always be one level higher than computer in some way.

Even I and I am a weak player could get a good position against Rybka in the Ruy Lopez (C65). Rybka had a pinned knight on f6 and played the weakening move g5. From there I got a better position but didn't play on.

If you had played on, you would have won that game and the next, and the next, etc.

You guys can say what you want, but I answered him best.

Matthias.

[Mark Mason]

All,
According to this thread on Rybka Forum Armando Great was using an engine for this game (he is "Footbolo" nick in the engine room) but the GUI failed to display that fact ?? Look down towards the bottom of the thread.....


http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=10762

[Uri]

All,
According to this thread on Rybka Forum Armando Great was using an engine for this game (he is "Footbolo" nick in the engine room) but the GUI failed to display that fact ?? Look down towards the bottom of the thread.....


http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=10762

I really doubt he used an engine. Really, give the guy some credit. I believe he won against Rybka honestly. It's hard for me to believe he cheated and got his 3217 rating dishonestly.

As Terry McCracken also pointed out in this thread, our software clearly its limits.

This means that from time to time or in some positions it will make weak moves. And no wonder that a strong human player like Oligarckh or Armando Great will be able to exploit this limits and defeat Rybka from time to time even if only 1 game out of 10.