GM says Rybka & Fritz weaker than best GMs in classical

[Terry McCracken]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

[Uri Blass]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

[Terry McCracken]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

No Uri, you're wrong. Maybe you need to be a GM to realize this or have decades of experience dealing with GM's and computers.

[Matthias Gemuh]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

Please, don't just accept anything because it is Bob who has said it
Bob is a computer expert but we too understand this stuff.

There is more to rectify in Bob's last posting, but I lack the time to do it.

Matthias.

[Terry McCracken]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

Please, don't just accept anything because it is Bob who has said it
Bob is a computer expert but we too understand this stuff.

There is more to rectify in Bob's last posting, but I lack the time to do it.

Matthias.

I don't just accept it, I know it to be true. I've also a lot of computer experience and experience with GM play.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

No Uri, you're wrong. Maybe you need to be a GM to realize this or have decades of experience dealing with GM's and computers.

Uri is a correspondence grandmaster,he covered his latest norm early this year....
The funny thing is that I was going to post a thread today asking where is Uri as he didn't post for a long time and bang,there he is

[George Tsavdaris]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

Please, don't just accept anything because it is Bob who has said it
Bob is a computer expert but we too understand this stuff.

There is more to rectify in Bob's last posting, but I lack the time to do it.

Matthias.

I don't just accept it, I know it to be true. I've also a lot of computer experience and experience with GM play.

The bad thing is you are assuming as a de facto that others don't have any experience with computers and with GM play.

[Terry McCracken]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

No Uri, you're wrong. Maybe you need to be a GM to realize this or have decades of experience dealing with GM's and computers.

Uri is a correspondence grandmaster,he covered his latest norm early this year....
The funny thing is that I was going to post a thread today asking where is Uri as he didn't post for a long time and bang,there he is

He's a Corr GM not an OTB GM, big difference

[George Tsavdaris]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

No Uri, you're wrong. Maybe you need to be a GM to realize this or have decades of experience dealing with GM's and computers.

Uri is a correspondence grandmaster,he covered his latest norm early this year....
The funny thing is that I was going to post a thread today asking where is Uri as he didn't post for a long time and bang,there he is

He's a Corr GM not an OTB GM, big difference

Why it's a big difference?
He has very good planning and strategical Chess abilities as also very good Chess knowledge, as also(since he is playing with computer help) knows very well the "secrets" of Chess engines and uses them very efficiently.

All that means:
•He knows very very well about Chess engines.
•He has very good Chess knowledge.

An OTB GM has amazing calculating abilities, but this is irrelevant.

So as you can see a Corr GM's opinion is what we can say: an expert's opinion about the discussed matter.

[Terry McCracken]

A GM can _way_ out-calculate a computer along sharp tactical lines for the most part,

That is not true for today's hardware and top engines !!!!!.

Matthias.

No, I'm afraid it is true, Bob is right.

There are many many such examples out of human play that prove this, Bob explained accurately why the GM's often fail and why.

No

I think that he is not right.
Today
The GM fail even to get a positional advantage against computers from the opening poosition and it means that A GM cannot even out-calculate a computer along positional lines most of the time.

The computer may play the good positional moves thanks to search and not thanks to superior evaluation but this does not change the fact that
rybka plays better positional moves relative to humans.

There are of course positions that rybka does not play well but humans usually cannot force them when rybka is using a book.

Uri

No Uri, you're wrong. Maybe you need to be a GM to realize this or have decades of experience dealing with GM's and computers.

Uri is a correspondence grandmaster,he covered his latest norm early this year....
The funny thing is that I was going to post a thread today asking where is Uri as he didn't post for a long time and bang,there he is

He's a Corr GM not an OTB GM, big difference

Why it's a big difference?
He has very good planning and strategical Chess abilities as also very good Chess knowledge, as also(since he is playing with computer help) knows very well the "secrets" of Chess engines and uses them very efficiently.

All that means:
•He knows very very well about Chess engines.
•He has very good Chess knowledge.

An OTB GM has amazing calculating abilities, but this is irrelevant.

So as you can see a Corr GM's opinion is what we can say: an expert's opinion about the discussed matter.

OTB GM's do know more and they too are experienced with computers these days. In fact we have more GM's now then ever before due to computers!