GM says Rybka & Fritz weaker than best GMs in classical

[Terry McCracken]

Humans make _very_ few tactical mistakes in correspondence chess?
Ridiculous ! It is the strong engines used for correspondence chess that "make _very_ few tactical mistakes" and you certainly know that.

Matthias.

For clarification:
Humans cross-check their weak tactics with strong engines in correspondence chess, and it is those engines that "make _very_ few tactical mistakes".
Bob erroneously gave this tactical merit too humans.

So anyone with "give me a break" doesn't understand the point.

Matthias.

This is directed at me, not Robert. Yes I Did Understand the Problem! You don't want the correct answer!!

I won't report you, but I was moderated and there is definate bias towards me!

Well Enough is Enough!

For all you guys know I may be a GM, however I'm not making that claim!

I am a good player and that is all you have to know.

P.S. Thorsten read your mail!

[S.Taylor]

In the July 2008 edition of Chess Life (page 44), GM Lev Alburt
claims "Playing under classical conditions (40 moves in 2 1/2 hours),
today's best grandmasters are still favorites vs. Rybka and Fritz".

I was under the opposite impression, but I'm not a GM.

Sounds like a challenge for some program to me.

The truth be known, some GM's really do beat these programs in their homes where there is no pressure or distractions.

Even lesser players win from time to time without the use of anti-computer play.

What do you mean withOUT?
When deep thought and deepblue were in early stages, GM's were shocked, and were losing. Karpov almost lost and managed to draw, but then Kasparov was seen as losing vs improved version.
Now, the best Rybka on normal fast computers today are probably way stronger than the latest version of Deep(er) blue which "crushed" Kasparov in a match.
Kasparov wasn't big in anti-computer playing, but was strongest ever human player (I believe. Or approx).
Now you say that many GM's can get a plus score vs top rybka on top but common commercial hardware, which I'm sure is atleast 100elo stronger than what crushed Kasparov.
Surely it must be anti-computer knowledge.

[Terry McCracken]

In the July 2008 edition of Chess Life (page 44), GM Lev Alburt
claims "Playing under classical conditions (40 moves in 2 1/2 hours),
today's best grandmasters are still favorites vs. Rybka and Fritz".

I was under the opposite impression, but I'm not a GM.

Sounds like a challenge for some program to me.

The truth be known, some GM's really do beat these programs in their homes where there is no pressure or distractions.

Even lesser players win from time to time without the use of anti-computer play.

What do you mean withOUT?
When deep thought and deepblue were in early stages, GM's were shocked, and were losing. Karpov almost lost and managed to draw, but then Kasparov was seen as losing vs improved version.
Now, the best Rybka on normal fast computers today are probably way stronger than the latest version of Deep(er) blue which "crushed" Kasparov in a match.
Kasparov wasn't big in anti-computer playing, but was strongest ever human player (I believe. Or approx).
Now you say that many GM's can get a plus score vs top rybka on top but common commercial hardware, which I'm sure is atleast 100elo stronger than what crushed Kasparov.
Surely it must be anti-computer knowledge.

Your history is in error and I said it is possible to still take games from them. I didn't go into matches.

Without means Without!

No More!

[Michael Sherwin]

How well do computers understand both the position and the game?

I saw the win faster than a computer. I saw it on the spot!

[d]r1bq1r1k/1pp3bp/8/p3pp2/2P3pn/P1NPP3/1BQ2PPP/R3RBK1 w - - 0 20



Zoltan Ribli vs Eric Lobron

If instead of Ne2 as in the game, what if Nd5 were played with the idea of Nf6 blocking the path of black's QR. Just a quick look, but looks winning for white.

There's no Ne2, there's a Nd2 and it's forced...and Nd5?? is losing fast.

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d3 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 d5
7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. O-O Kh8 9. a3 f5 10. Bd2 Bf6 11. Qc2 a5
12. Rfe1 Nb6 13. b3 g5 14. Bc1 g4 15. Nd2 Bg7 16. Bb2 Ne7
17. Bf1 Ng6 18. Nc4 Nxc4 19. bxc4 Nh4 20. Rad1 Ra6 21. d4 Nf3+
22. gxf3 gxf3 23. dxe5 Qh4 24. Ne2 Rh6 25. h3 fxe2 26. Qxe2 f4
27. e6 Rg6+ 28. Kh2 f3 29. Qc2 Qg5 0-1

Well there was a 'Ne2'!

But, in my haste I gave white an extra move.

[Terry McCracken]

How well do computers understand both the position and the game?

I saw the win faster than a computer. I saw it on the spot!

[d]r1bq1r1k/1pp3bp/8/p3pp2/2P3pn/P1NPP3/1BQ2PPP/R3RBK1 w - - 0 20



Zoltan Ribli vs Eric Lobron

If instead of Ne2 as in the game, what if Nd5 were played with the idea of Nf6 blocking the path of black's QR. Just a quick look, but looks winning for white.

There's no Ne2, there's a Nd2 and it's forced...and Nd5?? is losing fast.

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d3 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 d5
7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. O-O Kh8 9. a3 f5 10. Bd2 Bf6 11. Qc2 a5
12. Rfe1 Nb6 13. b3 g5 14. Bc1 g4 15. Nd2 Bg7 16. Bb2 Ne7
17. Bf1 Ng6 18. Nc4 Nxc4 19. bxc4 Nh4 20. Rad1 Ra6 21. d4 Nf3+
22. gxf3 gxf3 23. dxe5 Qh4 24. Ne2 Rh6 25. h3 fxe2 26. Qxe2 f4
27. e6 Rg6+ 28. Kh2 f3 29. Qc2 Qg5 0-1

Well there was a 'Ne2'!

But, in my haste I gave white an extra move.

Sorry I misunderstood you. Yes there is a Ne2 but I thought you were looking at something else

Anyway, if you play 24. Nd5?? then Black mates. Is that what you meant by extra move?

Please be clear.

[Terry McCracken]

Humans make _very_ few tactical mistakes in correspondence chess?
Ridiculous ! It is the strong engines used for correspondence chess that "make _very_ few tactical mistakes" and you certainly know that.

Matthias.

For clarification:
Humans cross-check their weak tactics with strong engines in correspondence chess, and it is those engines that "make _very_ few tactical mistakes".
Bob erroneously gave this tactical merit too humans.

So anyone with "give me a break" doesn't understand the point.

Matthias.

This is directed at me, not Robert. Yes I Did Understand the Problem! You don't want the correct answer!!

I won't report you, but I was moderated and there is definate bias towards me!

Well Enough is Enough!

For all you guys know I may be a GM, however I'm not making that claim!

I am a good player and that is all you have to know.

P.S. Thorsten read your mail!

Never mind Thorsten, I made a mistake and I removed the mail, I misunderstood one post.


Sorry...

[fern]

Curious argumentation as if fatigue, tactics mistakes, etc, were not part of the game.
I could, following the logic of Bob, say that I am 1000 times better than any program to see chess, but, well, bad luck, I lose almost every game due to tactics and distractions.
If only I could play them without tactics, fatigue, just comparing our higher strategic visions...

Sure I would be proclaimed bar better than Rybka regards
Fernando

[Dirt]

Really? Do you think a computer at correspondence could take down a top GM??

Give me a break! This is getting ridiculous!

I don't know who should be favored, but I'd love to see some games like that. No computer for the GM should mean no computer databases either, but free access to any books or printouts made before the game.

[Terry McCracken]

Curious argumentation as if fatigue, tactics mistakes, etc, were not part of the game.
I could, following the logic of Bob, say that I am 1000 times better than any program to see chess, but, well, bad luck, I lose almost every game due to tactics and distractions.
If only I could play them without tactics, fatigue, just comparing our higher strategic visions...

Sure I would be proclaimed bar better than Rybka regards
Fernando

Yep!

[Michael Sherwin]

How well do computers understand both the position and the game?

I saw the win faster than a computer. I saw it on the spot!

[d]r1bq1r1k/1pp3bp/8/p3pp2/2P3pn/P1NPP3/1BQ2PPP/R3RBK1 w - - 0 20



Zoltan Ribli vs Eric Lobron

If instead of Ne2 as in the game, what if Nd5 were played with the idea of Nf6 blocking the path of black's QR. Just a quick look, but looks winning for white.

There's no Ne2, there's a Nd2 and it's forced...and Nd5?? is losing fast.

1. c4 e5 2. Nc3 Nf6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d3 Be7 5. e3 O-O 6. Be2 d5
7. cxd5 Nxd5 8. O-O Kh8 9. a3 f5 10. Bd2 Bf6 11. Qc2 a5
12. Rfe1 Nb6 13. b3 g5 14. Bc1 g4 15. Nd2 Bg7 16. Bb2 Ne7
17. Bf1 Ng6 18. Nc4 Nxc4 19. bxc4 Nh4 20. Rad1 Ra6 21. d4 Nf3+
22. gxf3 gxf3 23. dxe5 Qh4 24. Ne2 Rh6 25. h3 fxe2 26. Qxe2 f4
27. e6 Rg6+ 28. Kh2 f3 29. Qc2 Qg5 0-1

Well there was a 'Ne2'!

But, in my haste I gave white an extra move.

Sorry I misunderstood you. Yes there is a Ne2 but I thought you were looking at something else

Anyway, if you play 24. Nd5?? then Black mates. Is that what you meant by extra move?

Please be clear.

24. Nd5 & Nf6 in a single leap.

I was very pressed for time.