Rybka Chess Community Forum
Have there specific rules been agreed upon, concerning draw offers and draw agreements? In other words, was GM Benjamin aware that such types of very obvious draws will 'brutally' be played up to the 50 moves rule?
I am somewhat irritated that after the draw was quite clear even much before 89.f6 (last pawn move), the torturing of one of America's best Grandmasters continued for another 50 moves. I think that is not necessary. For a reasonable 'period of shuffling' to make things clear(er), ok - but here it were ~120 moves of increasing disrespect, and pure anti-PR for Rybka and computer chess in general. Also, such games will not help to attract other GMs as opponents.
Remember that offering a draw here is thesame as resigning since draw is scored for Benjamin. There's nothing we can do about it because shufling of moves is how computers exhaust all posibilities until they accidentaly reach a correct plan :) As long as Rybka plays Legal moves theres no problem :)
The only thing that matters is what action is taken when the endgame position is drawn in the Endgame Tablebase. The game is usualy declared draw in Computer vs Human match but Rybka team might decide to continue playing because draw is loss here.
There is definately a problem, no matter if drawing = resigning from Rybka's viewpoint. It is a human decision I guess (unless specific rules have been created, as mentioned in my question).
To quote (c) The Rolling Stones: "Have some courtesy, have some sympathy, and some taste."
Never offering the draw in that 4th game certainly wasn't a sign of any of these. :-D
I think they've agreed to play out these kinds of positions. For the rybka team it's interesting to see how rybka handles drawn positions she thinks she's winning. Benjamin, having been on the Deep Blue team, is no stranger to computer chess, and probably has good understanding of what's happening. He probably knows the engine might blow this when the 50 move rule gets close.
I think they've agreed to play out these kinds of positions.
I agree - from the standpoint of either science or sport, it is not easy to exculpate an early draw decision.
PB> the torturing of one of America's best Grandmasters continued for another 50 moves
How do you know? He might have been laughing the whole way. :) [Though, in the given instance, there could still be a few consterning possibilities, like Rxb3 after doubling on the b-file].
He probably knows the engine might blow this when the 50 move rule gets close.
I'm not quite sure how the engine can "blow this" when a draw is the same as a loss. If anything, Rybka should have been more desperate in the waning moves.
I'm not quite sure how the engine can "blow this" when a draw is the same as a loss.
You are of course right. Still, I imagine a win is worth much more than a draw for Benjamin personally.
If anything, Rybka should have been more desperate in the waning moves.
Desperation is not an easy consept to teach an engine.
In fact, the contempt setting had this effect and Rybka very nearly tried something desperate when she saw the fifty move rule approaching, but finally decided it was just too bad to play. As for Benjamin, normally he would of course value a win over Rybka regardless of financial considerations, but in this case he understood that Rybka was instructed to take reasonably desperate measures to avoid a draw, and so a win would have meant little.
Interesting quote - it's from "Sympathy For The Devil" and the devil asks for courtesy and some sympathy. :)
Rybka plays with contempt in these games. And I think, some would have complained, if a draw had been offered.
Quote, ...some would have complained, if a draw had been offered.
This is interesting, because in past times - which are all over now - when Grandmasters still were favorites in such matches and comps were not as strong as now, I sometimes had the impression that 'courtesy draws' were given too early/easily, to GMs. So I would eventually have been among them who complained about a too early draw offer (but not about any draw offer). But the general situation has changed dramatically.
Also, considering the whole game since 19.b3 or at least since 38...h4, it especially disturbs me that even after the 89th move with the position being as drawish as before, the game had to continue for another 50 moves. This is hardly acceptable.
Of course I don't know how GM Benjamin thinks about that, but I cannot imagine that he was amused.
P.S. Das Zitat war vielleicht ganz passend, denn ein Mensch muß 'teuflisch gut' spielen um gegen Rybka remis zu halten. :-)
> Of course I don't know how GM Benjamin thinks about that, but I cannot imagine that he was amused.
Maybe the 6-hour marathon is a scheme by the Rybka team to try to tire him out. :) Fatigue is perhaps a more important consideration than anything that has been mentioned so far. [Indeed, it is perhaps the best argument for a "courtesy draw" to be offered, assuming the match is seen more as science than as sport].
But here, we have money on the line, money that comes from some of the people in this forum. It is owed to these people the best chance not to lose their money, and Joel understands this :-).
And I think, some would have complained, if a draw had been offered.
Now some complain that it hasn't been offered. I think this is hardly an argument.
Games are usually not played until mate either - if you don't want to insult your opponent that is. Ending the game with the 50-moves rule is obviously even worse. I'm wondering what the Rybka team has been waiting for after 89.f6.
Its 2-2. Should be quite exiting. But the game last night well was not exciting. Not to watch in live at least. But really interesting for Benjamin and Rybka developers I would think. They are probably having fun there, talking about what can be done and other things.
Well this is a problem about this match. The wins for Benjamin can get boring for spectators.
The chat at chessbase was mainly in German. I don't understandGerman too well so that took some fun out of this as well.
The game last night was very exciting IMO. The 4th game was one of the most interesting Human vs Computer game. The pawns weren't fully locked as how humans strive against computers but Benjamins ingenuity have managed to make the World best Chess player (ELO 3000+) wander like an idiot. Benjamin even sacrificed a piece which confuses his 3000+ ELO opponent even more!
you watched a different game to me then.
> Benjamins ingenuity have managed to make the World best Chess player (ELO 3000+) wander like an idiot. Benjamin even sacrificed a piece which confuses his 3000+ ELO opponent even more!
Seeing these games, I really doubt that Rybka has really 3000+ ELO.
I think what you're really seeing is that it is far, far easier to get two draws than to get one win.
Yes, but, even if Rybka's loses were counted as draws, what would be Rybka's performance ELO so far?
It would be 2855...but that's the thing. When the opponent is ONLY going for the draw, the performance is going to be far higher for the human than would be expected. I suspect that much of this has had an effect with Krapnik in the past decade.
It's a valid point, but I agree with Larry's policy. Some spectators (and posterity) will like having the full game. Besides, you never know what might happen - do you remember Rybka vs Zappa in Mexico? (Good, because I don't :))
You can think of the last 50 moves or so as the 4th quarter of a blowout.
Good analogy. In a 4th quarter blowout you can get away with just about anything. GM Benjamin should have used the occasion to drink all of Larry's beer! :-)
Joel understood that we need to play until fifty move rule because Rybka often only takes action in closed positions when the threat of fifty move rule draw is imminent. However I would offer a draw if I saw no possibility of winning. In this game there was a clear winning try available (reposition the knight) which unfortunately never worked due to exact variations. In the earlier draw I only continued because Joel didn't mind and I wanted to see when Rybka would realize the draw.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill