TalkChess.com

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:The authors of the chess programs are not interested in this "Play style" so to speak

IIRC, the programmer of ChessTiger was concerned and created an anti-anti-chess personality for the program, that would even sacrifice material if it was needed to open the position, and Pablo was not able to draw it at the time (but he went and showed his draws against normal ChessTiger.)

Ovyron wrote:

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:The authors of the chess programs are not interested in this "Play style" so to speak

IIRC, the programmer of ChessTiger was concerned and created an anti-anti-chess personality for the program, that would even sacrifice material if it was needed to open the position, and Pablo was not able to draw it at the time (but he went and showed his draws against normal ChessTiger.)

Yes,I remember that....

Father wrote:I am proud of being a donkey.

Chess Machines are situated lower down, or in low or lower degree or rank, as a lesser quality, or a little or less in importance, value, or merit, than animals.
....... ......................Then t is more simple for a human being brain teach a donkey how to play a guitar, than for a chess machine to understand a donkey.

This guy is off his rocker!

Indeed! I really fail to understand all the DENIAL that is going on here with the anti- Pablo crowd. Positional chess say in the style of a Nimzovich has to my knowledge not been achieved by the programs. Pablo's chess as I say is bizarre - but effective. In terms of the "opening Book concept" to prep for Pablos chess really does not address the issue here...1st) because I am sure other opening systems could perhaps achieve a blocked position. 2nd) is the program does not understand the concepts yet...... Interesting more GMs when playing a computer do not adopt a Plablos style of chess when in need of a draw.... Although now that I think of it many GMs HAVE used anti computer chess successfully...which drives home Pablo's real point of the machines failure I reiterate - FAILURE to grasp concepts of such nature at this time. It is interesting the more Pablo is attacked...the less strength their argument has...Attacking the man and not the ISSUE is a classic sign of an ego defense mechanism

P.S. go to you tube and check out Majnu 2006 in which a Blitz game by a 2800+ plus rated player went up against Hiarcs using Pablo's very own White stonewall system...Granted white lost with a blunder ...but still..... the idea is catching on

Nimzovik wrote:Indeed! I really fail to understand all the DENIAL that is going on here with the anti- Pablo crowd.

Although I don't agree with attacking Pablo personally, I think there are two things which attract the ire of others.

- it's not the done thing to blow your own trumpet too loudly too persistently.
- claiming wins on time as masterpieces is annoying, especially when there are questions as to how or why these time losses occur. The consensus seems to indicate that it's a GUI issue rather than an engine problem.

If Pablo only posted genuine wins (no wins on time) and draws, I'm sure that he wouldn't attract so much negative comment.
Genuine wins and draws against top engines are very creditable achievements.

Just my thoughts.

Regards, Graham.

Graham Banks wrote:

Nimzovik wrote:Indeed! I really fail to understand all the DENIAL that is going on here with the anti- Pablo crowd.

Although I don't agree with attacking Pablo personally, I think there are two things which attract the ire of others.

- it's not the done thing to blow your own trumpet too loudly too persistently.
- claiming wins on time as masterpieces is annoying, especially when there are questions as to how or why these time losses occur. The consensus seems to indicate that it's a GUI issue rather than an engine problem.

If Pablo only posted genuine wins (no wins on time) and draws, I'm sure that he wouldn't attract so much negative comment.
Genuine wins and draws against top engines are very creditable achievements.

Just my thoughts.

Regards, Graham.

All i know is i have played hundreds and hundreds of games ag. CM9 and CM10th personalities, and i have never won a game on time. It simply wont lose on time. The 50 move rule would kick in long before that. So i can only see 2 possibilities: He is playing an engine where an actual person is having to make the moves for the engine, and just cant make them in time, or its a crappy gui. Either way, it doesnt ring my bell. I dont have a horse in that race.

geots wrote:

Graham Banks wrote:

Nimzovik wrote:Indeed! I really fail to understand all the DENIAL that is going on here with the anti- Pablo crowd.

Although I don't agree with attacking Pablo personally, I think there are two things which attract the ire of others.

- it's not the done thing to blow your own trumpet too loudly too persistently.
- claiming wins on time as masterpieces is annoying, especially when there are questions as to how or why these time losses occur. The consensus seems to indicate that it's a GUI issue rather than an engine problem.

If Pablo only posted genuine wins (no wins on time) and draws, I'm sure that he wouldn't attract so much negative comment.
Genuine wins and draws against top engines are very creditable achievements.

Just my thoughts.

Regards, Graham.

All i know is i have played hundreds and hundreds of games ag. CM9 and CM10th personalities, and i have never won a game on time. It simply wont lose on time. The 50 move rule would kick in long before that. So i can only see 2 possibilities: He is playing an engine where an actual person is having to make the moves for the engine, and just cant make them in time, or its a crappy gui. Either way, it doesnt ring my bell. I dont have a horse in that race.

He was playing online and posting games from playchess, there the time losses for engine always do happen. It's the connection thingy or a premove advantage for human. Computers dont premove.

I float like a butterfly,
I sting like a bee.
I premove like a maniac,
but I checkmate like a vampire!

swami wrote:

geots wrote:

Graham Banks wrote:

Nimzovik wrote:Indeed! I really fail to understand all the DENIAL that is going on here with the anti- Pablo crowd.

Although I don't agree with attacking Pablo personally, I think there are two things which attract the ire of others.

- it's not the done thing to blow your own trumpet too loudly too persistently.
- claiming wins on time as masterpieces is annoying, especially when there are questions as to how or why these time losses occur. The consensus seems to indicate that it's a GUI issue rather than an engine problem.

If Pablo only posted genuine wins (no wins on time) and draws, I'm sure that he wouldn't attract so much negative comment.
Genuine wins and draws against top engines are very creditable achievements.

Just my thoughts.

Regards, Graham.

All i know is i have played hundreds and hundreds of games ag. CM9 and CM10th personalities, and i have never won a game on time. It simply wont lose on time. The 50 move rule would kick in long before that. So i can only see 2 possibilities: He is playing an engine where an actual person is having to make the moves for the engine, and just cant make them in time, or its a crappy gui. Either way, it doesnt ring my bell. I dont have a horse in that race.

He was playing online and posting games from playchess, there the time losses for engine always do happen. It's the connection thingy or a premove advantage for human. Computers dont premove.

I float like a butterfly,
I sting like a bee.
I premove like a maniac,
but I checkmate like a vampire!

In that case, Swami- i have to admit that i myself might even feel a little proud the first time or 2. But that would get old fast. At any rate, i cant possibly see where it merits half a page of threads.

Best,

It merits half of a page of threads because certain mechanisms/dynamics are occuring in these posts 1) Pablo needs to be defended as he is personally attacked. This is simply wrong. His english lends to a certain APPARENT bravado. This is not the truth of the man who is actually very humble. He is actually just a very poetic soul that is not bragging -he is showing a well known weakness of programs - a certain inabilty to handle certain types of positonal chess. His repeated postings (games) of his approach to chess is REQUIRED when met with -again I MUST state- DENIAL of a particular truth. (That the programs can not at this stage of development grasps such abstract concepts of -shall we say 'blocking' the position on the board.) How many programs do YOU know that play like a Nimzovich? The WIN against the machine is NOT the issue for all the time glitch and GUI issues mentioned. The fact that the positions are a DRAW is the issue. As we all know a draw against an opponent in a tournament is definitely a strong tactic at times- just ask Petrosian-or perhaps his ghost .2) As I said check out the youtube video. Pablo's ideas are becoming a way to compete against machines by other STRONG players The machines are going to have to DEAL with that.