Rybka 4, free download?

[Terry McCracken]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

[Albert Silver]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

I Googled Fischer IQ, and came up with a page that gave the IQs of many famous people, Fischer being one of them. It had Einstein with an IQ of 160, and Sharon Stone at 154... It took a while for me to stop laughing.

[Terry McCracken]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

I Googled Fischer IQ, and came up with a page that gave the IQs of many famous people, Fischer being one of them. It had Einstein with an IQ of 160, and Sharon Stone at 154... It took a while for me to stop laughing.

The internet is certainly entertaining at times...

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

I Googled Fischer IQ, and came up with a page that gave the IQs of many famous people, Fischer being one of them. It had Einstein with an IQ of 160, and Sharon Stone at 154... It took a while for me to stop laughing.

[David Dahlem]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

http://listverse.com/2007/10/06/top-10-geniuses/

First off, you may be surprised to find that Albert Einstein is not included on this list. The reason is that I have used a table of IQ estimates for historical geniuses to determine the members and order of this list, and Einstein’s IQ (around 160) did not make the grade. Despite that, he is still the first person to pop in to most people’s minds when thinking of a genius. Having said that, here is a list of the ten greatest geniuses in history.

Code: Select all

1. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe    IQ: 210
2. Leonardo Da Vinci             IQ: 205
3. Emanuel Swedenborg            IQ: 205
4. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz IQ: 205
5. John Stuart Mill              IQ: 200
6. Blaise Pascal                 IQ: 195
7. Ludwig Wittgenstein           IQ: 190
8. Bobby Fischer                 IQ: 187
9. Galileo Galilei               IQ: 185
10. Madame De Stael              IQ: 180

[rhollay]

I Googled Fischer IQ, and came up with a page that gave the IQs of many famous people, Fischer being one of them. It had Einstein with an IQ of 160, and Sharon Stone at 154... It took a while for me to stop laughing.

IIRC Kasparov's IQ was measured, and it was about 130...

[Terry McCracken]

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.

Einstein's IQ was never measured as well. In both cases the numbers are meaningless, outside that they both had high IQ's. Outside of chess and puzzle solving Fischer wasn't brilliant, Einstein was.

There's a bouncer in the US whose IQ was measured and is over 200. His wife is slightly below 170 but she plays better chess.

So this means what? Right, not too much.

http://listverse.com/2007/10/06/top-10-geniuses/

First off, you may be surprised to find that Albert Einstein is not included on this list. The reason is that I have used a table of IQ estimates for historical geniuses to determine the members and order of this list, and Einstein’s IQ (around 160) did not make the grade. Despite that, he is still the first person to pop in to most people’s minds when thinking of a genius. Having said that, here is a list of the ten greatest geniuses in history.

Code: Select all

1. Johann Wolfgang von Goethe    IQ: 210
2. Leonardo Da Vinci             IQ: 205
3. Emanuel Swedenborg            IQ: 205
4. Gottfried Wilhelm von Leibniz IQ: 205
5. John Stuart Mill              IQ: 200
6. Blaise Pascal                 IQ: 195
7. Ludwig Wittgenstein           IQ: 190
8. Bobby Fischer                 IQ: 187
9. Galileo Galilei               IQ: 185
10. Madame De Stael              IQ: 180

Flew right over...whoosh!

[Terry McCracken]

I Googled Fischer IQ, and came up with a page that gave the IQs of many famous people, Fischer being one of them. It had Einstein with an IQ of 160, and Sharon Stone at 154... It took a while for me to stop laughing.

IIRC Kasparov's IQ was measured, and it was about 130...

It's a joke....You're suppose to laugh.

[djbl]

no michaelangelo? no rembrant? no newton? no watson and crick? and what exactly did wittgenstein do except confuse himself about rabbits?

[djbl]

and placing goethe @ #1 in a list that does not even include shakespeare? each to their own