Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9635
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb » Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:04 pm

Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

Albert Silver
Posts: 2870
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:57 pm
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Albert Silver » Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:31 am

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D
Yeah. Gee. Wow. Who would believe a GM could lose to a computer? Completely agree this is an endless issue. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."

User avatar
Matthias Gemuh
Posts: 3238
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:10 am
Contact:

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Matthias Gemuh » Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:42 am

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D


People who still claim that strongest humans are better at chess than strongest engines on QuadCore (or better), are just too embarassed to admit that that they are totally wrong !
Why deny facts ?

Matthias.
My engine was quite strong till I added knowledge to it.
http://www.chess.hylogic.de

Tony Thomas

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Tony Thomas » Sun Jun 29, 2008 5:46 am

Matthias Gemuh wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D


People who still claim that strongest humans are better at chess than strongest engines on QuadCore (or better), are just too embarassed to admit that that they are totally wrong !
Why deny facts ?

Matthias.
I happen to agree that there are times when programs look over things. Romi has been beaten online by merely 2000 rated humans 3 times in about 40 or so games humans Played against Romi. I however have my doubts as to if they can beat a program such as Rybka consistently without advantages.

Uri
Posts: 423
Joined: Thu Dec 27, 2007 8:34 pm

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Uri » Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:41 am

It depends. Some GMs know how to exploit computer weaknesses better than others and so are better against computers. It's really difficult to say who is better. GMs are very strong strategically, computers are very strong tactically especially in open positions so in a 1 till 5 minute games computers have the upper hand but in a 90m+30s game, the GM has the upper hand over the computer i think.

User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9635
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:10 pm

Thanks for your comments so far,I still believe that the strtegically weaker chess engines are still stronger than the tactically weaker humans :mrgreen:
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

Gandalf

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Gandalf » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:33 pm

I think that the effect of faster hardware is overrated when it comes to how well a top engine performs against humans. After all, engines are vastly better than humans in tactics either way, and in the rare situations where humans prevail it is because of strategy and not tactics. Would Kasparov have noticed a difference between a 12 and 16 ply searcher? On the other hand, would he have noticed the difference between Rybka 1.0's eval and Rybka 2.3.2a's eval?

Michael Sherwin
Posts: 3046
Joined: Fri May 26, 2006 1:00 am
Location: WY, USA
Full name: Michael Sherwin

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Michael Sherwin » Sun Jun 29, 2008 2:46 pm

Gandalf wrote:I think that the effect of faster hardware is overrated when it comes to how well a top engine performs against humans. After all, engines are vastly better than humans in tactics either way, and in the rare situations where humans prevail it is because of strategy and not tactics. Would Kasparov have noticed a difference between a 12 and 16 ply searcher? On the other hand, would he have noticed the difference between Rybka 1.0's eval and Rybka 2.3.2a's eval?
When you say, "12 and 16", I assume that you are refering to Kasparov vs Deep Blue. If that is true then Kasparov would have 'easily' won the match if Deep Blue was only searching 12 ply. If you are strictly refering to Rybka then no, because compared to Deep Blue, Rybka is a strategical monster. A 12 ply Rybka would probably win a match against a 16 ply Deep Blue (JMO). I have played alot of games against free Rybka and Rybka shuts down any 'strategical' plan that I have ever had, mostly before I can get it going.
I hate if statements. Pawns demand if statements. Therefore I hate pawns.

Kurt Utzinger
Posts: 169
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 8:31 pm
Location: Switzerland
Contact:

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Kurt Utzinger » Mon Jun 30, 2008 10:59 am

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another
proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years
already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D
Why was the GM willing to play at (for human absolutely hopeless) time
control of 15m+10s ?? No other comments are needed for this useless match.
Kurt

User avatar
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9635
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan

Re: Man vs chess engines,the endless issue....

Post by Dr.Wael Deeb » Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:15 pm

Kurt Utzinger wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Hi all,
Please take a look here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 09&start=0

Now,do you think that the 2600 Elo rated GM did well or this is another
proof that the machines had surpassed the humans by several light years
already :!: :?:

Please drop your opinion if interested in this thread :D
Why was the GM willing to play at (for human absolutely hopeless) time
control of 15m+10s ?? No other comments are needed for this useless match.
Kurt
But he is 2600 rated professional GM,he can play blitz chess games against stronger humans at 3 minutes + ?? increment,so what's the problem by playing with 15m+10s :!: :?:

Note that he was playing against amateur chess engines,strong but still....

My personal opinion is that even if he was playing using one hour and the engines using the current time control,the outcome won't be much different,maybe another half point....

Again,he's a 2600 rated GM for God sake....
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….

Post Reply