Luke skywalker has done it again.

[Terry McCracken]

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047

King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does

April Fool's A bit late.

Depends on the place.

[Terry McCracken]

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047

King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does

I'm embarrassed for Chessbase.

You people are too funny.

[Terry McCracken]

It's a joke, a late April Fools.

Of course. ChessBase is known to publish a day before and a day after it would seem, one of their April Fool pranks.

Whatever has been done doesn't hold any water regardless and they know that.

[Terry McCracken]

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8047

King's gambit "weakly solved" by Vas. Admit it. This guy definately knows what he does

Solved is the wrong word. Maybe the best move the computer could come up with is more like it.

This whole thing comes down to the validity of the assumption that if Rybka scores 5.12 or more, it is a win with 99.99999999% certainty and that it follows that this happens to be the same certainty for the entire results.

I really have a difficult time with both those assumptions and I want to know how he came up with that value. This is about 1 in 10 billion positions! That means if you sacrifice a queen, or a rook plus a pawn or two that you automatically lose (except once every 10,000,000,000 times.)

I have to say that I think this is utter nonsense, my years of experience in computer chess and other games tells me that no matter what the "score" reported by the program (other than Mate) there are holes in the knowledge and search that can make this go wrong.

The number seems to be a poetic license picked in a conversation with a journalist, rather than a number you write in a paper. Like a teen ager saying I am super-hyper-duper-sure, so I am 99.9999.... etc.

The bottom line is, there is a 100% probabilities to reach a position +5.12 in rybka scale for black after 1.e4 e5 2. f4 exf4 3. Nf5 d6.

Or, this system returns

Code: Select all

3... d6 :-) >+5.12 

(I hope some people pick my joke)

Miguel

Yes, I see it...and why are people giving this article any credence??? I mean really...

[Don]

Yes, I see it...and why are people giving this article any credence??? I mean really...

You have to consider the source. I have to assume that you did not read the ICGA refutation piece they did. Read that first, then tell me if you think this sounds wacky for them.

But I have to admit that this seems a bit much to believe that Vas would be this stupid. When I read that I felt embarrassed for Vas so I hope this really is a joke.

[LudiBuda]

I hope this is just an April's Fool's joke.
Otherwise I will lose most of my respect for Vas (I lost respect for Chessbase and their articles long time ago).

[rbarreira]

I hope this is just an April's Fool's joke.

It can't be, as it was not published on April the 1st... So it's either true or a regular hoax.

[G.B. Harms]

I hope this is just an April's Fool's joke.

It can't be, as it was not published on April the 1st... So it's either true or a regular hoax.

"On March 31 the author of the Rybka program, Vasik Rajlich, and his family moved from Warsaw, Poland to a new appartment in Budapest, Hungary. The next day, in spite of the bustle of moving boxes and setting up phone and Internet connections Vas, kindly agreed to the following interview, which had been planned some months ago."


I find it a very good one!

[rbarreira]

I hope this is just an April's Fool's joke.

It can't be, as it was not published on April the 1st... So it's either true or a regular hoax.

"On March 31 the author of the Rybka program, Vasik Rajlich, and his family moved from Warsaw, Poland to a new appartment in Budapest, Hungary. The next day, in spite of the bustle of moving boxes and setting up phone and Internet connections Vas, kindly agreed to the following interview, which had been planned some months ago."


I find it a very good one!

It is cleverly written, but you can't just publish something on any day of the year and call it an April Fools' joke just because you mention that date somewhere in the article. That is rather lame...

[G.B. Harms]

I hope this is just an April's Fool's joke.

It can't be, as it was not published on April the 1st... So it's either true or a regular hoax.

"On March 31 the author of the Rybka program, Vasik Rajlich, and his family moved from Warsaw, Poland to a new appartment in Budapest, Hungary. The next day, in spite of the bustle of moving boxes and setting up phone and Internet connections Vas, kindly agreed to the following interview, which had been planned some months ago."


I find it a very good one!

It is cleverly written, but you can't just publish something on any day of the year and call it an April Fools' joke just because you mention that date somewhere in the article. That is rather lame...

I understand what you mean. However in Netherlands many April 1st jokes are announced in magazines, newspapers, etc. before that day, but mentioning that day. Here it is written after that day but mentioning that day. That's about the same, just more clever imo.