Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:_Hehehe,to your own information,I do even own one of these 3D glasses and I bought them then with the newest video card available in the market,so I do know what I am talking about....They're a little bit uncomfortable to use,but in no way don't cause severe headache as you stated sir....
_Now severe pain you say,eh
Hi Dr. Deeb,
Regarding the 3D glasses thing I think Terry has a point. 3D glasses are widely known to cause headaches in some individuals after extended wear. I believe this is due to the actual and perceived focal point of the 3D image being at different depths, causing eye strain for some people.
Hi Robin,
I didn't say that Terry hasn't a point,it's just that the 3D glasses are far away from causing a severe pain as he stated....Note that when releasing such a product for the public,it passes a several procedures of testing and approval before it finds it's way to the market....several years ago I was an addicted pc gamer using such glasses for hours and I didn't feel the slightest sign of a headache,let alone a severe one....
Of course,every individual reacts differently to the device,that's a fact,but causing a severe pain is rather a rare phenomena....
_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….
Machines may win more games but not due to superiour play overall, but due to human weakness at some point in the game, whether it be oversight or fatigue, something machines can't suffer from.
I mostly agree.
Suppose that computers really did play better chess, in some sense, than humans. Then why are centaurs so much better than computers playing by themselves?
For the same reason that centaurs are so much better than humans playing by themselves. Human players and computers don't have the same areas of strength, and Centaurs are a combination of their fortes. Does this mean that human's fortes are more significant than computer's? Of course not. The winner of the game man-machine will tell you which one is more significant, and we all know who wins.
RegicideX wrote:There is only one answer
No. See above. Sorry, Alex, your comparison doesn't make sense.
RegicideX wrote: -- because humans still understand many important parts of the game better than the computers. That's true even though human weakness, as you put it, makes humans lose a lot.
Human players do understand better and compute worse. Overall, computing has the upper hand over understanding. Time will only increase the difference in favor of computing.
RegicideX wrote:That said, computers are better at spotting tactics and they are able to make excellent moves often -- but they still have a thing or two to learn from humans.
Sure. But humans won't be able to learn a thing from the number crunching abilities of computers. Tendency, time, are against human players. Of course we can always say that engines and machines are man-made.
One simple point: the winner plays best overall.
Enrique
Kasparov failed to win his last matches, yet he did play best overall.
Interesting.
I think we disagree here. You say that Kasparov played better because you, as the human player you are, understand and value more what he did than the number crunching of the machine. But if the machine won, and it did, it necessarily means that the machine played better overall. Not the way you appreciate, I understand that, but since the purpose of the game is winning, the winner is the better player.
Enrique
No, I understood the chess itself, and Kasparov only managed to draw, not lose but draw the match.
I understood Kasparov's chess which was more complex than the computers chess.
Kasparov failed to win more to do with misfortune than anything else. A headache and he tosses the won game etc.
How well will the computer do if I can give it a migrane?
No excuses please....and besides,were you in his head to see if he had a migrane or any kind of headache
I don't deny the weakness of the human nature though,these things happen,but even in a perfect condition,the human can draw an odd match at best nowadays against a top chess engine running on an octal machine....We have limits Terry,or....
If you knew anything at all about the match I'm referring to then you would know he was wearing X3D Glasses, (a promotional scheme), where the manufacturers said it was ill-advised to wear their device for more than an hour due to serious eye strain which could result in severe headaches.
Kasparov was suffering from severe pain due to this device and couldn't stay focused! He had an overwhelming position against the computer and accidently made a terrible move even a player like yourself wouldn't make! He also stated publicly that he was suffering a tremendous headache due to those very same glasses!
Maybe you think this is fair sportmanship? He either wore the glasses to promote their product or there would be no match!
I think Kasparov should have turned the match down; However, I don't know if he knew ahead of time the 3D Glasses would be such a serious problem?
They were and cost Kasparov an important victory and winning the match.
In another match he offered a draw in a position that he would have won but felt the computer could draw it and offered a draw. He was turned down, but after 20 min. consulting another GM they came back and gave him the draw as they realized, backed with proof that they would lose if Kasparov continued!
These aren't excuses, they're facts!
_Hehehe,to your own information,I do even own one of these 3D glasses and I bought them then with the newest video card available in the market,so I do know what I am talking about....They're a little bit uncomfortable to use,but in no way don't cause severe headache as you stated sir....
_Now severe pain you say,eh
And even a player like myself won't make his terrible move,eh
You are day dreaming again....
_Yes,like the fact that he got the big bucks for wearing a 3D glasses,it's a fact,no doubt....
This is nothing but pure emotion on your part. I'm trying my best to restrain mine.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:_Hehehe,to your own information,I do even own one of these 3D glasses and I bought them then with the newest video card available in the market,so I do know what I am talking about....They're a little bit uncomfortable to use,but in no way don't cause severe headache as you stated sir....
_Now severe pain you say,eh
Hi Dr. Deeb,
Regarding the 3D glasses thing I think Terry has a point. 3D glasses are widely known to cause headaches in some individuals after extended wear. I believe this is due to the actual and perceived focal point of the 3D image being at different depths, causing eye strain for some people.
Hi Robin,
I didn't say that Terry hasn't a point,it's just that the 3D glasses are far away from causing a severe pain as he stated....Note that when releasing such a product for the public,it passes a several procedures of testing and approval before it finds it's way to the market....several years ago I was an addicted pc gamer using such glasses for hours and I didn't feel the slightest sign of a headache,let alone a severe one....
Of course,every individual reacts differently to the device,that's a fact,but causing a severe pain is rather a rare phenomena....
But it happens, that's the point. Those glasses come with a warning.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:_Hehehe,to your own information,I do even own one of these 3D glasses and I bought them then with the newest video card available in the market,so I do know what I am talking about....They're a little bit uncomfortable to use,but in no way don't cause severe headache as you stated sir....
_Now severe pain you say,eh
Hi Dr. Deeb,
Regarding the 3D glasses thing I think Terry has a point. 3D glasses are widely known to cause headaches in some individuals after extended wear. I believe this is due to the actual and perceived focal point of the 3D image being at different depths, causing eye strain for some people.
Hi Robin,
I didn't say that Terry hasn't a point,it's just that the 3D glasses are far away from causing a severe pain as he stated....Note that when releasing such a product for the public,it passes a several procedures of testing and approval before it finds it's way to the market....several years ago I was an addicted pc gamer using such glasses for hours and I didn't feel the slightest sign of a headache,let alone a severe one....
Of course,every individual reacts differently to the device,that's a fact,but causing a severe pain is rather a rare phenomena....
But it happens, that's the point. Those glasses come with a warning.
This is true,I can't find the original box of the glasses,but I clearly remember somehting like if you feel any kind of optic or orientation disorder during or after using the device,quit using it....but nothing was mentoined regarding the refund issue
_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….
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Is your brain getting overheated Terry during the summer
What are you going to report me about,that I an saying that machines are superior to humans when it comes to chess
And I don't buy your understanding of GM chess as you don't seem to understand the top chess engines play in the first place....
Nothing but ad hominems, no facts and a personal attack on my integrity, implying I'm too weak a player to know what I'm talking about! You're simply wrong. I do in fact understand both GM chess and computer chess.
I reported one of your posts and it was deleted! It was deleted as you made a referrence about my state of mind, that I was delusive! You're doing it again and this is your last warning! If you do this one more time and can't show deference like a gentleman would, I'll report it!
I think you owe me an apology...
_I didn't mean to insult you,that was not my intension at all....
_What proofs you are talking about,isn't Hydra-Adams match enough prrof for you to finaly confess the superior of the machines
He played the chess engine as he's playing another human and was crushed 0,5-5,5....Can you elaborate a little bit please as your human GM chess understanding is far away from mine
_I can't understand the deep faith in the the human GM chess when everyone can see that the party for them is over,finito....try to live with that....
The Adams match was horrible and Adams played horribly! Hydra made bad endgame errors and Adams didn't even notice! He was psyched!
I know my understanding is higher than yours, I've been involved with chess and computer chess probably longer than you have been living!
Your party is over, I've enough of your disrespect! Talk to me in a decade or two.
I'm not at all interested in the opinions of kids without experience who show no courtesy to their elders! Live with that!
_a pure sample of overreacting,don't underestimate people you don't know nothing about....
Ditto!
_So not sharing your opinion is a disrespect,eh
No need to wait for a decade or two,having Rybka 3 involved with ChessBase predicts a big possibility that one of your outgorgeous grandmasters will have the chance to ply the monster in a 6 or 8 games match and then shall see....
That's good to hear. No need for your adjectives.
_So how old are you Terry so that I can give enough respect to my elders
No irony intended btw....
That's really impolite. I don't share personal information with the public.
It's interseting that although my views differ from Enrique, not all of them but some key points, and you don't see us arguing.
Whenever someone has a very different perspective than yours it draws heavy fire.
I've discussed this with Larry Kaufman and the arguement remained civil, in fact he agreed with some, not all but some of my key points.
I'm sure you can play good chess, but you appear to lack a certain understanding that older and wiser players have.
Why not just agree to disagree if you can't see my side of the arguement?
I like your Fischer problems. Why not post more for me to solve. I'm sure I won't get them all correct.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:_Hehehe,to your own information,I do even own one of these 3D glasses and I bought them then with the newest video card available in the market,so I do know what I am talking about....They're a little bit uncomfortable to use,but in no way don't cause severe headache as you stated sir....
_Now severe pain you say,eh
Hi Dr. Deeb,
Regarding the 3D glasses thing I think Terry has a point. 3D glasses are widely known to cause headaches in some individuals after extended wear. I believe this is due to the actual and perceived focal point of the 3D image being at different depths, causing eye strain for some people.
Hi Robin,
I didn't say that Terry hasn't a point,it's just that the 3D glasses are far away from causing a severe pain as he stated....Note that when releasing such a product for the public,it passes a several procedures of testing and approval before it finds it's way to the market....several years ago I was an addicted pc gamer using such glasses for hours and I didn't feel the slightest sign of a headache,let alone a severe one....
Of course,every individual reacts differently to the device,that's a fact,but causing a severe pain is rather a rare phenomena....
But it happens, that's the point. Those glasses come with a warning.
This is true,I can't find the original box of the glasses,but I clearly remember somehting like if you feel any kind of optic or orientation disorder during or after using the device,quit using it....but nothing was mentoined regarding the refund issue
They should have a refund clause, I don't own them myself. In your case they don't seem to have a negative impact so enjoy them!
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Is your brain getting overheated Terry during the summer
What are you going to report me about,that I an saying that machines are superior to humans when it comes to chess
And I don't buy your understanding of GM chess as you don't seem to understand the top chess engines play in the first place....
Nothing but ad hominems, no facts and a personal attack on my integrity, implying I'm too weak a player to know what I'm talking about! You're simply wrong. I do in fact understand both GM chess and computer chess.
I reported one of your posts and it was deleted! It was deleted as you made a referrence about my state of mind, that I was delusive! You're doing it again and this is your last warning! If you do this one more time and can't show deference like a gentleman would, I'll report it!
I think you owe me an apology...
_I didn't mean to insult you,that was not my intension at all....
_What proofs you are talking about,isn't Hydra-Adams match enough prrof for you to finaly confess the superior of the machines
He played the chess engine as he's playing another human and was crushed 0,5-5,5....Can you elaborate a little bit please as your human GM chess understanding is far away from mine
_I can't understand the deep faith in the the human GM chess when everyone can see that the party for them is over,finito....try to live with that....
The Adams match was horrible and Adams played horribly! Hydra made bad endgame errors and Adams didn't even notice! He was psyched!
I know my understanding is higher than yours, I've been involved with chess and computer chess probably longer than you have been living!
Your party is over, I've enough of your disrespect! Talk to me in a decade or two.
I'm not at all interested in the opinions of kids without experience who show no courtesy to their elders! Live with that!
_a pure sample of overreacting,don't underestimate people you don't know nothing about....
Ditto!
_So not sharing your opinion is a disrespect,eh
No need to wait for a decade or two,having Rybka 3 involved with ChessBase predicts a big possibility that one of your outgorgeous grandmasters will have the chance to ply the monster in a 6 or 8 games match and then shall see....
That's good to hear. No need for your adjectives.
_So how old are you Terry so that I can give enough respect to my elders
No irony intended btw....
That's really impolite. I don't share personal information with the public.
It's interseting that although my views differ from Enrique, not all of them but some key points, and you don't see us arguing.
Whenever someone has a very different perspective than yours it draws heavy fire.
I've discussed this with Larry Kaufman and the arguement remained civil, in fact he agreed with some, not all but some of my key points.
I'm sure you can play good chess, but you appear to lack a certain understanding that older and wiser players have.
Why not just agree to disagree if you can't see my side of the arguement?
I like your Fischer problems. Why not post more for me to solve. I'm sure I won't get them all correct.
I will,but I'll choose the hard ones,not the ones with mate in one or two....
If I can't find any in this particular book,I'll refine my database and start posting tough positions similar to Petrosian's ones....
Stay tuned
_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….
It's much easier today to be a top GM in chess than it was in the time of William Steinitz and Paul Morphy. Today there are strong playing chess programs which can assist you, thousands of chess books and teaching DVDs from strong GMs like Daniel King, Roman Dzindzichashvili and Rustam Kasimdzhanov.
This is why i consider William Steinitz to be the greatest chess player of all time. He is the one who invented modern chess theory. Siegbert Tarrasch, Emanuel Lasker and Aron Nimzowitsch later improved on Steinitz's theory.
Mischa wrote:There is also the question of style. The weird playing style of a Junior 7 for example might very well be quite effective against strong humans OTB, while Junior 7 gets totally destroyed by any of the top engines today.
Junior 7 has no chance against a strong GM in my opinion. The program makes strategical and positional mistakes that a strong GM or even today's strongest programs like Deep Rybka 3 or Deep Shredder XP will never make. A strong GM will easily spot these mistakes and take advantage of them. Hell, even i beat Junior 7 several times and i'm only rated 1300.
Uri wrote:It's much easier today to be a top GM in chess than it was in the time of William Steinitz and Paul Morphy. Today there are strong playing chess programs which can assist you, thousands of chess books and teaching DVDs from strong GMs like Daniel King, Roman Dzindzichashvili and Rustam Kasimdzhanov.
This is why i consider William Steinitz to be the greatest chess player of all time. He is the one who invented modern chess theory. Siegbert Tarrasch, Emanuel Lasker and Aron Nimzowitsch later improved on Steinitz's theory.
I dont think it's easier to be a GM nowadays because everyone has access to the above mentioned programs. As a result, there are a heck of a lot more people playing chess, and only the ones that got a certain amount of talent make it to the top.
