Father(Human) wins to Rybka 4. May 22, 2010. Beta - Photos

[Father]

Rybka 4 + 6 = 0 - 1
Average:

Pablo: 14.28%
Rybka 4: 85.714%

We must wait... Rybka 4 an others ...

[Father]

Hello Mike,

I forgot something. The answer to your question, depends of many factors. For example, how many games you play against a machine, etc; Just a second example, I think I have played in total 2 games against Hircas 13.1. and my score is one draw one lost, then my score there is now 25%, and I claim for an virtual elo over 2.900.

But just as other new example: it is perfectly possible this hipotesis: One game played one game won for the antichesser inside; then in this case the human perfermance will be 100% and her/his virtual elo over 3.000.

Rybka 3 broke the tradicional paradigms... It is a real antichessers monster !!! It reduces from 50% chances to 3-10% in bullets and blitz games. But of course there are new ideas for human being brain, and then, Rybka 3 will be on troubles again.

Long time control games in man versus machine of course are easer for human being iniside antichesser; Why? becouse of speed by itself it is not enough for solving the antichess puzle.

But I have changed my goal now. Problem is: Is it possible that engine will be invensible? I dont belive on it...

Sincerely,

Pablo
Father playchess.com usser

[Dr.Ex]

Rybka was white, our fellow Antichesser was black. Of course white is not winning at the end. Maybe you will figure that out some day.

[rhollay]

Maybe, I will be here very incisive.

According to your profile, you are Lawyer. I tried to find you in Linkedin or other social networks for work but I did not succeed. In general, a lawyer always takes care of details, simple details. I find you make a lot of errors when typing your English no caring the most simple correction.

If I have understood all this stuff, the engine looses because of certain bug in the chess client GUI connected to the playchess server. Continuing in this semantic of details, have you ever tried these engines in different GUIs such as Winboard, Shredder, ChessPartner, applying your concepts of Antichess? What is more, have you tried longer time controls without applying the same tricks of premoving?!

I find really weird that you only post the wins and not the looses that you face. What is the proportion of looses vs. wins?!

Could you please post some games that human players won against Rybka, Hiarcs, Stockfish or other engines of similar strength?

Pablo can.

Rybka + Playchess server + GUI + bug = MACHINE
Pablo = HUMAN

Period.

[frcha]

hi pablo,
i think you are reading to much into this lock the postition and use premove parlor trick.
whats your ratio?
1 in 500?
show us your wins a standard time controls.

this has been done since the first dedicated chess board machines
came out regards,
mike

Can you the parlor trick he does? is so please post the game.

[Nimzovik]

I rather think Mike is missing the point. There are things that a machine simply does not understand. This is the issue Pablo highlights.

[Father]

Thanks you Sean,

Something about Rybka 4 Beta versus Father:

Look my black Rook in queen inside, and my black Knight in queen inside. These two warriors never were moved in all the game eventought they did their best.!! It is incredible an a possible inspiration for writting a new paradigm of antichess principles; something like that:

#.. many times if you are playing against a Top Chess Computer dont move your elements; the best funtion of them could be to be quiet and in absolute silence.

Regards,

Pablo

[F. Bluemers]

I rather think Mike is missing the point. There are things that a machine simply does not understand. This is the issue Pablo highlights.

Well known issue and f.i. fixed in chesstiger 2007.

Pablo has 0 score against it afaik.

[ovidio123]

Why are you attacking Pablo's language and personality? What does that have to do with chess and his win against Rybka?

Ovidio

PS BTW, your typing also has some errors....

[Nimzovik]

Ah yes...... the ches tiger stuff. Note that this isuue does not solve the Pablo problem. If one were a Gm and played Pablo tactics the said Gm wins ..... If the program is then 'tweaked' the Gm perhaps wins again because said tweaks then creates another exploitable weakness of the program by the Gm. The fact that Pablo does what he does against such a vast rating difference simply can not be ignored or repressed. As Pablo indicates there is a paradigm that chess machines do not comprehend.