Uri Blass wrote:
I do not like to support rybka4 after Rybka supported topalov against anand.
Uri
You are kidding right! Last I heard Topalov paid for access to Rybka, it was not offered to him for free or was it? If it was then I would say they supported Topalov. Not that I see that as a reason not to buy Rybka 4. Now if you said it was because they never gave Rybka 3 customers Rybka 3+ as promised I could understand that.
PS: Did you see ...
Veselin Topalov:I do not think Anand should be very proud of this. Especially by the fact he accepted help from the first two. I have been among the chess elite for 15 years and perfectly remember how Kasparov treated Anand for years. And not long before the World Championship match in Bonn 2008, Anand had to stand the arrogant statements of his opponent in the press. I would never accept help from people who humiliated me for years even for free. But it seems Anand is different.
Topalov is a truly great chess player, BUT it is really hard to take him seriously after the toiletgate issue from the Krammnik match. AND now he is bellyaching when he got another championship shot on his home turf nonetheless. He is just mad because all the cool kids wanted to help Anand and not him!
Topalov talks to much. Anand just plays...and wins!!
I am excited to see if Carlsen can bust through the next cycle. I think Anand-Carlsen would be a great and exciting match.
I thnk that it is all the more amazing to see what Fischer did WITHOUT computers than it would be with them!
He was so far above everyone of his time because of his talent and his ability\willingness to devote almost all his time and energy to the "game". Now, for $100, or even for free, everyone has access to programs that are better (at least tactically) than anyone.
It is easier now for less talented people to "memorize lines" and use pc databases to get ideas from other people's games. (Not saying that did not happen in the past, but today ANYONE can do it.) Of course, you still need to work hard today to be at the top, but the programs do "narrow the gaps" I think.
It is much less impressive to me if Topalov beat Anand in game 1 with some line that he (or his team) learned from a program, than when a novelty that a player worked out on his own was used on someone in a key situation.
Fischer today would not be so far above his peers because of the "equalizing" effect of the software. Of course, once on their own in a game, I believe that he could have been impressive against the best of today---or anytime!
I thnk that it is all the more amazing to see what Fischer did WITHOUT computers than it would be with them!
He was so far above everyone of his time because of his talent and his ability\willingness to devote almost all his time and energy to the "game". Now, for $100, or even for free, everyone has access to programs that are better (at least tactically) than anyone.
It is easier now for less talented people to "memorize lines" and use pc databases to get ideas from other people's games. (Not saying that did not happen in the past, but today ANYONE can do it.) Of course, you still need to work hard today to be at the top, but the programs do "narrow the gaps" I think.
It is much less impressive to me if Topalov beat Anand in game 1 with some line that he (or his team) learned from a program, than when a novelty that a player worked out on his own was used on someone in a key situation.
Fischer today would not be so far above his peers because of the "equalizing" effect of the software. Of course, once on their own in a game, I believe that he could have been impressive against the best of today---or anytime!
I believe that fischer could also be clearly number 1 with software help.
I believe that
Fischer was good mainly because of his memory.
I read that after a blitz tournament of many games he could remember all the games and I read other stories about his exceptional memory.
I believe that software could not help other people to be equal to fischer in the opening because fischer could be better in memorizing more lines.
Chess is clearly a memory game even if you are in unknown territory
and you clearly use your memory about patterns when you analyze(not to mention the fact that you need to use your memory when you analyze a lot of options during the game and not forgetting what you analyzed is clearly an advantage).
kingliveson wrote:
Uri, I couldn't disagree more. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vas allowing access to his software for a fee. Vas is a business man, and the WC had no rules that you couldn't use any tools available for preparation. It didn't help as the result showed, but that's another story...
I think it did help!
Without it topalov wouldnt last till the very last round
I thnk that it is all the more amazing to see what Fischer did WITHOUT computers than it would be with them!
He was so far above everyone of his time because of his talent and his ability\willingness to devote almost all his time and energy to the "game". Now, for $100, or even for free, everyone has access to programs that are better (at least tactically) than anyone.
It is easier now for less talented people to "memorize lines" and use pc databases to get ideas from other people's games. (Not saying that did not happen in the past, but today ANYONE can do it.) Of course, you still need to work hard today to be at the top, but the programs do "narrow the gaps" I think.
It is much less impressive to me if Topalov beat Anand in game 1 with some line that he (or his team) learned from a program, than when a novelty that a player worked out on his own was used on someone in a key situation.
Fischer today would not be so far above his peers because of the "equalizing" effect of the software. Of course, once on their own in a game, I believe that he could have been impressive against the best of today---or anytime!
I believe that fischer could also be clearly number 1 with software help.
I believe that
Fischer was good mainly because of his memory.
I read that after a blitz tournament of many games he could remember all the games and I read other stories about his exceptional memory.
I believe that software could not help other people to be equal to fischer in the opening because fischer could be better in memorizing more lines.
Chess is clearly a memory game even if you are in unknown territory
and you clearly use your memory about patterns when you analyze(not to mention the fact that you need to use your memory when you analyze a lot of options during the game and not forgetting what you analyzed is clearly an advantage).
Uri
I agree with Uri. Computers give much more advantage to those with great memory, the ability to glean the ideas behind the computer moves (so if opponent deviates you know why it is bad), and those with great work ethic. Basically no one could compete in combining these three areas. In addition, it would give Fischer someone to spar with (without having to worry about stolen openings) which, given he was too paranoid to get consistent help in that area, would be more valuable to him than it is to many others.
tomgdrums wrote:
Topalov is a truly great chess player, BUT it is really hard to take him seriously after the toiletgate issue from the Krammnik match. AND now he is bellyaching when he got another championship shot on his home turf nonetheless. He is just mad because all the cool kids wanted to help Anand and not him!
Topalov talks to much. Anand just plays...and wins!!
I am excited to see if Carlsen can bust through the next cycle. I think Anand-Carlsen would be a great and exciting match.
I feel bad for Topalov. A player of his caliber should be able to better control his emotions in a post match interview. It was a close match after all. No need to act so childishly, he will have more chances at the world title soon.
tomgdrums wrote:
Topalov is a truly great chess player, BUT it is really hard to take him seriously after the toiletgate issue from the Krammnik match. AND now he is bellyaching when he got another championship shot on his home turf nonetheless. He is just mad because all the cool kids wanted to help Anand and not him!
Topalov talks to much. Anand just plays...and wins!!
I am excited to see if Carlsen can bust through the next cycle. I think Anand-Carlsen would be a great and exciting match.
I feel bad for Topalov. A player of his caliber should be able to better control his emotions in a post match interview. It was a close match after all. No need to act so childishly, he will have more chances at the world title soon.
kingliveson wrote:
Uri, I couldn't disagree more. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vas allowing access to his software for a fee. Vas is a business man, and the WC had no rules that you couldn't use any tools available for preparation. It didn't help as the result showed, but that's another story...
Now that I think about it, in a way, Topalov is very lucky to be living in an age where chess software can help combat human preparation. In part, Anand got his wonderful team by being willing to share his preparation with a future competitor and his trainer, an option not available to the ... errr ... more combative personalities in the chess world. If you think about previous paranoid contenders, such as Fischer or Korchnoi, they were always facing large teams of grandmasters and could only counter it with extremely hard work. Now adays, even if you are unwilling or unable to share your thoughts / ideas / preparation with others in a team oriented way, you can at least secure significant hardware support. It would have been amazing to see what Fischer could have done if he had been born in the computer age.
-Sam
One can only imagine....Fischer's IQ was a resounding 189 ! to put that into perspective ....einstien's was around 160. With the power of programs today ...what Fischer might have been able to do is almost scary. That much brain power with so much software power yikes !
kingliveson wrote:
Uri, I couldn't disagree more. There is absolutely nothing wrong with Vas allowing access to his software for a fee. Vas is a business man, and the WC had no rules that you couldn't use any tools available for preparation. It didn't help as the result showed, but that's another story...
Now that I think about it, in a way, Topalov is very lucky to be living in an age where chess software can help combat human preparation. In part, Anand got his wonderful team by being willing to share his preparation with a future competitor and his trainer, an option not available to the ... errr ... more combative personalities in the chess world. If you think about previous paranoid contenders, such as Fischer or Korchnoi, they were always facing large teams of grandmasters and could only counter it with extremely hard work. Now adays, even if you are unwilling or unable to share your thoughts / ideas / preparation with others in a team oriented way, you can at least secure significant hardware support. It would have been amazing to see what Fischer could have done if he had been born in the computer age.
-Sam
One can only imagine....Fischer's IQ was a resounding 189 ! to put that into perspective ....einstien's was around 160. With the power of programs today ...what Fischer might have been able to do is almost scary. That much brain power with so much software power yikes !
Regards
BT
Bear in mind Fischer's IQ is not from a test, but an estimate made.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
Last I heard Topalov paid for access to Rybka, it was not offered to him for free or was it? If it was then I would say they supported Topalov. Not that I see that as a reason not to buy Rybka 4. Now if you said it was because they never gave Rybka 3 customers Rybka 3+ as promised I could understand that.
