Matthias Gemuh wrote:
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.
CRoberson wrote: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.
CRoberson wrote: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.
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.
If you are on a sidewalk and the covid goes beep beep
Just step aside or you might have a bit of heat
Covid covid runs through the town all day
Can the people ever change their ways
Sherwin the covid's after you
Sherwin if it catches you you're through
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.
Matthias Gemuh wrote:
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.
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
Terry McCracken wrote:
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.
fern wrote: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
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.
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.
If you are on a sidewalk and the covid goes beep beep
Just step aside or you might have a bit of heat
Covid covid runs through the town all day
Can the people ever change their ways
Sherwin the covid's after you
Sherwin if it catches you you're through
It is the strong engines used for correspondence chess that "make _very_ few tactical mistakes" and you certainly know that.
