Djinji vs Rybka 4-4, shows alot of hope to mankind.

[Golem]

What real chess are you talking about when your opponent's knight is not on the board before the game is even started

The knight was on the board but I think you would mean "when a pawn is missing"... Pawn odd is just an handicap. What about a time handicap (Human takes 5x more time than the computer), is it chess for you ? The thing you seems to complain about is that you can not add those games to your database (as standard and 'clean' chess games) and make statistics with it...

I don't count this as a good performance by Roman,I would admit and respect his performance if he played a normal chess game and even got 2,5-5,5 against Rybka,now this is interesting because it will be added to the record of man vs machine and give us a better picture of where we are standing now....

You are so rude, but I'm sure you know it's a good performance... It's not so easy to draw a match against rybka, even when she has a pawn less.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

What real chess are you talking about when your opponent's knight is not on the board before the game is even started

The knight was on the board but I think you would mean "when a pawn is missing"... Pawn odd is just an handicap. What about a time handicap (Human takes 5x more time than the computer), is it chess for you ? The thing you seems to complain about is that you can not add those games to your database (as standard and 'clean' chess games) and make statistics with it...

I don't count this as a good performance by Roman,I would admit and respect his performance if he played a normal chess game and even got 2,5-5,5 against Rybka,now this is interesting because it will be added to the record of man vs machine and give us a better picture of where we are standing now....

You are so rude, but I'm sure you know it's a good performance... It's not so easy to draw a match against rybka, even when she has a pawn less.

I know that the knight was on the board and the pawn is missing,but AFAIK,the next odd match will be a knight's odd match and I gave it as an example....I read this yesterday in the Rybka's forum....

Why being rude when I said that I don't consider his performance as a success
Or let's put it this way:yes,it's a good "odd" performance for the audiance who likes such an odd chess variants....

The time odd games are also not my cup of tea,you are right about that....

If things continue going this direction,soon we will see a queen odd match or know what ,let's throw the chess engine's king and equalize the human possibility to ground the computer

Anyway,thanks for your reply and I am open to any discussion regarding this issue,I was thinking of even starting a pool to see what the members of this forum think about this issue

[gerold]

What real chess are you talking about when your opponent's knight is not on the board before the game is even started

The knight was on the board but I think you would mean "when a pawn is missing"... Pawn odd is just an handicap. What about a time handicap (Human takes 5x more time than the computer), is it chess for you ? The thing you seems to complain about is that you can not add those games to your database (as standard and 'clean' chess games) and make statistics with it...

I don't count this as a good performance by Roman,I would admit and respect his performance if he played a normal chess game and even got 2,5-5,5 against Rybka,now this is interesting because it will be added to the record of man vs machine and give us a better picture of where we are standing now....

You are so rude, but I'm sure you know it's a good performance... It's not so easy to draw a match against rybka, even when she has a pawn less.

I know that the knight was on the board and the pawn is missing,but AFAIK,the next odd match will be a knight's odd match and I gave it as an example....I read this yesterday in the Rybka's forum....

Why being rude when I said that I don't consider his performance as a success
Or let's put it this way:yes,it's a good "odd" performance for the audiance who likes such an odd chess variants....

The time odd games are also not my cup of tea,you are right about that....

If things continue going this direction,soon we will see a queen odd match or know what ,let's throw the chess engine's king and equalize the human possibility to ground the computer

Anyway,thanks for your reply and I am open to any discussion regarding this issue,I was thinking of even starting a pool to see what the members of this forum think about this issue

Good idea. I don't care for non-chess either
I would vote in that pool for sure.

[playjunior]

I would vote in the poll too-I am not interested in those matches too

[Golem]

What I'm trying to say is that it's better to have this kind of match than no match at all but it seems I'm the only one to think this way... When someone will be able to win a match at pawn odd, maybe we will see a standard chess match.

PS : I think nobody wants to be crushed by rybka at standard chess for a so 'small' amount of money.

[M ANSARI]

Roman is one of the most experienced anti computer chess players ... I believe he will have better chances in a match against a computer than Anand or Kramnik. The problem with strong chess engines today is that they are so tactically strong. They will play moves that make no sense to a human but have an accurate tactical foundation. I would estimate that the strongest engine on very strong hardware is 400 or 500 ELO points stronger tactically than the strongest human GM ... that is a huge gap. The strongest GM's are still very strong strategically and have the edge in positional understanding ... but even that advantage is getting smaller and smaller. How many times have we seen a human totally outplay a chess engine only to falter to a tactical oversight. I think the days where the strongest GM can win a match against a fully stocked Rybka are long over ... they might still win a game here and there ... but in a match there is simply no chance.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Roman is one of the most experienced anti computer chess players ... I believe he will have better chances in a match against a computer than Anand or Kramnik. The problem with strong chess engines today is that they are so tactically strong. They will play moves that make no sense to a human but have an accurate tactical foundation. I would estimate that the strongest engine on very strong hardware is 400 or 500 ELO points stronger tactically than the strongest human GM ... that is a huge gap. The strongest GM's are still very strong strategically and have the edge in positional understanding ... but even that advantage is getting smaller and smaller. How many times have we seen a human totally outplay a chess engine only to falter to a tactical oversight. I think the days where the strongest GM can win a match against a fully stocked Rybka are long over ... they might still win a game here and there ... but in a match there is simply no chance.

Why do I totaly agree with this statement of yours Majd
BTW,we both will be annihalated by Terry.....