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

[Nimzovik]

the point is that there is no point.
this flaw in programs has been known and deminstrated
for a long,long time.
evidently the programmers dont care enough to alter
there programs to prevent it.

That's just wrong. The situation has improved. A couple of years back when I tried this Nonsense out of curiosity against then leading programs Shredder and Hiarcs, they would lock up the position completely almost all the time.

Now this doesn't seem to work often anymore. Last time I looked father had 6% at playchess and lost several times 20 games in a row before he was lucky to get a completely locked up position.

Whether his success rate has decreased is not the issue. I reiterate -the fact that such tactics do prove successful is the issue. Of such nuances possibly championships can be won or lost. The chink in the armor is demonstrably there. Period.

[F. Bluemers]

the point is that there is no point.
this flaw in programs has been known and deminstrated
for a long,long time.
evidently the programmers dont care enough to alter
there programs to prevent it.

That's just wrong. The situation has improved. A couple of years back when I tried this Nonsense out of curiosity against then leading programs Shredder and Hiarcs, they would lock up the position completely almost all the time.

Now this doesn't seem to work often anymore. Last time I looked father had 6% at playchess and lost several times 20 games in a row before he was lucky to get a completely locked up position.

Whether his success rate has decreased is not the issue. I reiterate -the fact that such tactics do prove successful is the issue. Of such nuances possibly championships can be won or lost. The chink in the armor is demonstrably there. Period.

I don't agree ,especially since father asks not to use any special settings or an anti-human book.Which makes the whole thing a rather "abstract" excercise imho.
Best
Fonzy

[BubbaTough]

I believe it would be quite possible for me to make a program that Father would never, ever, draw or beat. The problem is that the program would be much worse against other opposition, and its more fun to work on general improvements than anti-anti-computer stuff. The whole area is unlikely to be addressed seriously unless engines are allowed to receive reliable information about their opposition (such as humans receive).

One big problem in computer chess is the tools we use generally are poorly suited for supporting passing the engine knowledge about the opponent. For example, I enquired with testing groups whether they passed rating information in the UCI protocol, so that I could have hannibal auto-adjust playing style based on rating difference. The answer was universally no. Until information about an opponent becomes commonly available to chess engines, it is unlikely much progress in this area will occur.

-Sam

[Nimzovik]

Ah yes...... However a GM plus Father's ideas would be formidable against the machines..... Yes?

[Dr.Ex]

No!

[fern]

My dear Pablo:
Which is the sense to play not playing at all? And using once and again the same recipe?
I can understand you got some fun the very fist 10 games -to be generous- you played with that style for the half point, but, ¿100? ¿1000?
I prefer to lose one game after another but fighting, getting the joy of making many good moves and the thrill of just one mistake putting my plane in flames.
In fact, when I played many games against dedicated units, I tried NOT to remember the opening and lines that conducted the machine to a defeat in order NOT to lose the excitement of trying again from scratch.
All that is a kick...

But well, you have the right to enjoy as you wish
un abrazo
Fern

[Father]

Fernando,

Gracias por el comentario, igualmente tú tienes todo el derecho de opinar con la mayor libertad.

Antes de todo aprovecho la oportunidad de este corto intercambio de palabras, para manifestar mi felicidad por ver que estás con bien, luego de tan doloroso suceso del pasado terremoto en nuestro hermano País Chile.

Siempre me pregunté como estabas, pero jamás me atreví a escribir aquí publicamente en el foro, de manera que el ver que continúas intercambiando mensajes, es en sí misma, la mejor noticia para mí.

Quiero además manifestarte que el ajedrez que usualmente juego con mis amigos es absolutamente agresivo, al ataque, lleno de muchos sacrificios, siguiendo lo que pude aprender de esa gran inteligencia que fue Bobby Fischer. Me encanta especualar, hacer sacrificios, estudiar problemás tacticos en playchess.com, de hecho los problemas tacticos, es una de las cosas que más me gusta del programa Fritz 12 en el servidor.

Finalmente dejo este pequeño extracto de una noticia imaginaria por mí adaptada al idioma Ingles que tal vez algún día yo aprenda un poco más a escribir y que había escrito para Alex pero que para no fatigar ni saturar este foro acumulo en este post solamente.

THE CHESSERS NIGHTMARES

“By The BBC London.
August 7, 2090

Father's – Pablo Ignacio Restrepo- championing of Antichessism was controversial within his lifetime, when a large majority of chessplayers and journalists still subscribed (at least outwardly) to the chess view that the conventional chess paradigms were at the centre of the game. After 2002, when he began publicly supporting the Antichess view, which placed the development and attack at the centre of the chess game history, he met with bitter opposition from some chessplayers and Scientifics, and two of the latter eventually denounced him to the Forums chess- Inquisitions early in 2006. In May 2010, although he had been cleared of any offence, the forums nevertheless condemned Antichess as "false and contrary to Scripture", and Father was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Itself with the Antitheses System, “how to be a top Antichesser,” published in 2020, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest after been declared Crazy and Suspicious, where pass away after millions of games played against chess computers, that his friends says many times won whereas all the news papers claimed: “Chess Computers Are invincible. Nobody in Earth has the chance of take at least one draw!!”

“By an anonymous Antichesser”



Cordialmente,

Pablo

[Guenther]

Hi, congratulations on winning.

I played through the game with Fritz 12 and found it to be a terribly played game by Rybka. It allowed White to gain a huge space advantage with simple pawn moves and Rybka did not develop it's back row! If this is as good as Rybka4 plays it is going to get demolished by many chess engines :twisted:

...snip...

Cordially,

Sean

You mixed up the colours. Rybka was White and the Human was Black.
This means you wanted to say Pablo played terrible ;-)

[rhollay]

You mixed up the colours. Rybka was White and the Human was Black.
This means you wanted to say Pablo played terrible

No, black was the new Rybka4 Antichess Ultra Static personality, at least 200 ELO stronger than Rybka4 Standard

[Arturo Ochoa]

You are welcome. BTW, I did not intend to offend you at all with my post. If I did, please, I apologize.

1) http://www.merriam-webster.com/netdict/loose
Main Entry: 1loose
Pronunciation: \ˈlüs\
Function: adjective
I believe you misused this word in your initial post.

2) What I do not understand from your initial posting is why, even if you disagreed with his chess claims, you decided to attack a) his language skills and b) his professional qualifications. You and I, as well as Pablo, speak English as a foreign language, so errors and mistakes are expected to be made. I believe it is extremely rude to make fun of them.

Thank you,


Si no fuese mucha molestia, te rogaria que no continuemos discutiendo sobre este tema: no es ni importante. ni productiva. Tampoco quisiera dar motivos para que otras personas se inmiscuyan en este asunto y creen una controversia mayor. He leido algunos posteos tuyos y, de ellos, he extraido una opinion sobre vos que creo que es correcta: que sos bien educado e instruido. Desearia mantener mi opinion intacta. Si en algun momento te ofendi, quiero que sepas que no lo hice a proposito.

Gracias.

Gracias por la observación. Pero también tienes detalles en tu inglés como todos. No es "posting" sino "post", entre otros...
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/posting
Computers.
a.a message that is sent to a newsgroup.
b.text that is placed on a Web site.

En cuanto a mí, trabajo activamente con cierto autor de un programa de ajedrez (no del tope, pero bien conocido).

En el caso de la persona que citas, veo que no has visto su historial de mensajes.

Para empezar el término Antichess está mal empleado: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antichess.

Segundo, no he visto todavía la elaboración de un sistema concreto más que algunos juegos ganados por uno de esos bugs del GUI de ChessBase.

A quién convence llenando el Forum con títulos de letra del tamaño 36 o un juego blitz de cada quién sabe cuántos. Y detesto perder tiempo dando explicaciones. Mi error fue darle importancia a otro juego fallido.

No es importante mantener para mí si en este Foro, tienen buena o no opinión de mí. Más de la mitad de los nombres, puedo asegurar no son reales..., así que... no tienes que disculparte y yo no tengo que justificarme.