Your prejudice is blinding you, as is visible from that utter nonsense.... As if most novices spent their time trying to analyze simplified endgames with the wrong bishop. Mind you, I agree it needs to be fixed, but seriously, how much Elo do you think that has cost Rybka 3 in its testing? Give me a ballpark figure.frcha wrote:before this "clone controversy" , Rybka 3 was only useful for very strong players who do a lot of preparation /and correspondence players who use engines.
Most average players were better off with the default engines in their chess software
Rybka 3 is a complete rip off for chess novices and lower rated players because it gives the WRONG evaluation in many common chess positions.
this is a known fact that is swept aside by most who claim that all chess players even novices are aware of the blind bishop problem - they are not.
I cant believe the number of games i have seen when running my engine tests where this position is reached and Rybka stupidly thinks its winning in a dead draw ..
This bug alone make this engine unsuitable for all novices and weak players - a lot of whom have purchased rybka 3 and have no clue that the eval is wrong.
Additionally, even if you do know of the blind bishop situation -- weak players may be unable to figure out that rybka's overly optimistic eval is based on that a few moves earlier.
There are many extremely casual chess players who have very little chess knowledge who have purchased rybka 3 and trust its judgement completely - remember Rybka 3 was the World Champion for quite a while now.
Rybka 4 can be only be useful for a few if it is the strongest engine -- but if the bugs are not fixed -- why should most bother with it ?
Anyone running out to buy R4 is a Jerk
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 3019
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: Sins, sins,sins.........
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
-
- Posts: 6401
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:30 pm
- Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Re: Sins, sins,sins.........
It the issue is learning chess, most average players will be better off reading a book... and I mean it.frcha wrote:before this "clone controversy" , Rybka 3 was only useful for very strong players who do a lot of preparation /and correspondence players who use engines.
Most average players were better off with the default engines in their chess software
Miguel
PS: or practicing with tactical problems.
Rybka 3 is a complete rip off for chess novices and lower rated players because it gives the WRONG evaluation in many common chess positions.
this is a known fact that is swept aside by most who claim that all chess players even novices are aware of the blind bishop problem - they are not.
I cant believe the number of games i have seen when running my engine tests where this position is reached and Rybka stupidly thinks its winning in a dead draw ..
This bug alone make this engine unsuitable for all novices and weak players - a lot of whom have purchased rybka 3 and have no clue that the eval is wrong.
Additionally, even if you do know of the blind bishop situation -- weak players may be unable to figure out that rybka's overly optimistic eval is based on that a few moves earlier.
There are many extremely casual chess players who have very little chess knowledge who have purchased rybka 3 and trust its judgement completely - remember Rybka 3 was the World Champion for quite a while now.
Rybka 4 can be only be useful for a few if it is the strongest engine -- but if the bugs are not fixed -- why should most bother with it ?
-
- Posts: 660
- Joined: Sat Dec 05, 2009 5:13 am
- Location: Colorado, USA
Re: Sins, sins,sins.........
It actually GAINED about +0.2ish elo.Albert Silver wrote:Your prejudice is blinding you, as is visible from that utter nonsense.... As if most novices spent their time trying to analyze simplified endgames with the wrong bishop. Mind you, I agree it needs to be fixed, but seriously, how much Elo do you think that has cost Rybka 3 in its testing? Give me a ballpark figure.frcha wrote:before this "clone controversy" , Rybka 3 was only useful for very strong players who do a lot of preparation /and correspondence players who use engines.
Most average players were better off with the default engines in their chess software
Rybka 3 is a complete rip off for chess novices and lower rated players because it gives the WRONG evaluation in many common chess positions.
this is a known fact that is swept aside by most who claim that all chess players even novices are aware of the blind bishop problem - they are not.
I cant believe the number of games i have seen when running my engine tests where this position is reached and Rybka stupidly thinks its winning in a dead draw ..
This bug alone make this engine unsuitable for all novices and weak players - a lot of whom have purchased rybka 3 and have no clue that the eval is wrong.
Additionally, even if you do know of the blind bishop situation -- weak players may be unable to figure out that rybka's overly optimistic eval is based on that a few moves earlier.
There are many extremely casual chess players who have very little chess knowledge who have purchased rybka 3 and trust its judgement completely - remember Rybka 3 was the World Champion for quite a while now.
Rybka 4 can be only be useful for a few if it is the strongest engine -- but if the bugs are not fixed -- why should most bother with it ?
Peter
-
- Posts: 9773
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
- Location: Amman,Jordan
Re: Anyone running out to buy R4 is a Jerk
It's your opinion and it's your world....I respect that....Highendman wrote:Your hyperbole opinions are so absurd in my universe they almost end up funny, really.Dr.Wael Deeb wrote: ...Vasik has proved to be the worst ever author of a commercial chess engine regarding his actions toward the customers in many aspects... Dr.D
-HEM
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
-
- Posts: 221
- Joined: Thu Jan 28, 2010 5:47 pm
Re: Sins, sins,sins.........
I have seen novices do this -- of course they are entitled to waste their money how they see fit -- but I'm just pointing out that Rybka is not a good "authority" on good moves /eval -- in fact a free engine like Toga suits them much better.Albert Silver wrote: As if most novices spent their time trying to analyze simplified endgames with the wrong bishop. Mind you, I agree it needs to be fixed, but seriously, how much Elo do you think that has cost Rybka 3 in its testing? Give me a ballpark figure.
If Rybka 3 gained ELO by not fixing this bug, how come the so called clone which fixed the bug has more ELO?
Most likely they could not be bothered fixing it and released Rybka as is.
-
- Posts: 3019
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: Sins, sins,sins.........
Wel, I won't argue since your comments clearly show a complete disregard for objectivity ("they are entitled to waste their money"), which means you are not open to dialogue.frcha wrote:I have seen novices do this -- of course they are entitled to waste their money how they see fit -- but I'm just pointing out that Rybka is not a good "authority" on good moves /eval -- in fact a free engine like Toga suits them much better.Albert Silver wrote: As if most novices spent their time trying to analyze simplified endgames with the wrong bishop. Mind you, I agree it needs to be fixed, but seriously, how much Elo do you think that has cost Rybka 3 in its testing? Give me a ballpark figure.
If Rybka 3 gained ELO by not fixing this bug, how come the so called clone which fixed the bug has more ELO?
Most likely they could not be bothered fixing it and released Rybka as is.
As to the clones being stronger due to that.... that was pretty funny.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."