Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Why is this .... ?
- - By jamerolle (**) Date 2007-06-29 01:01
How come we are not learing form Rybka and other great engines from books. If you look at the great chess players of the past and present we can all find instructional games on their play. Having said that,  I beleave Rybka is todays Bobby Fischer/best player  but all we do with Rybkas games is manifest increadable rating list and statictics. Instead I think chess writers  should be breaking down Rybkas play and creating books and lessons from them. I think we have gone off base of why computers chess was created in the first place.

Yes I know info has been writen highlighting style of Rybkas play  however to my knowleadge nothing has been writen for instruction. It seem with the millions of chess games created for the rating list the value of a chess game has gone down nothing. With Fischers games each game was broken down and savered as a fine wine for instuctional purpuse.

Is computer play to complex for humans to learn anything from? or has the "all mighty" rating list replaced a the value of a great game and the learning that comes with them.?
Parent - - By Psilocybe (**) Date 2007-06-29 03:57
Classic: n. 1. An artist, author, or work generally considered to be of the highest rank or excellence, especially one of enduring significance. 2. A work recognized as definitive in its field. (

A top human chess player output is exceptional. His output is very limited and significative: a few dozen games every year and from important tournaments. Rybka's or any other engine best moves, can be reproduced every single day in almost any PC. Also everyday you can find other moves of similar quality. Simply if you have not the fastest hardware you let the engine run longer.

So, today in chess 'classic' still is a word of the human realm, 'classic' is not for engine games, except when they were played against human (e.g. Kasparov-Deep Blue)
Parent - - By Psilocybe (**) Date 2007-06-29 04:04
Addendum: in order to be fair with programmers, engine's games are not classics, but the engine itself is a classic.
Parent - By M ANSARI (*****) Date 2007-06-29 05:55
It is very hard for a human to understand chess engine play ... especially someone who is new to chess.  Engines have the ability to play tactical chess at a phenomenal level ... therefore typical fundemental chess moves which are taught by humans will on many occasions be actual blunders because they fail tactically.  Without the insight of a very strong tactical ability the engine will many times seem to be playing weak positional moves that are against all chess principles ... but for the engine they make sense because the seemingly strong move liked by a human can actually fail by a tactical trick.
Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-06-29 13:05
Sounds like silly psychobabble to me.  Reproducing a move is very different from reproducing a complete game.  Many human moves once considered great are now found to be errors.  The human intuition cannot be reproduced by computers but why would you want to?  It's basically a guess based on past experience and not necessarily the best line of play.  The fact that the opponent helps by not making the best reply adds to the myth.  Computers play better than humans now and forever more.  Just accept it!
Parent - - By Psilocybe (**) Date 2007-06-29 15:56
Your post is non-sequittur. Computers play better chess than humans, but, I don't want to read a book of commented engine games because in my own database of games played by my own computer I can find similar games or better.
Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-06-29 17:55
Hello Psilocybe, (your momma call you that?)
Since I'm a high school dropout I will ignore the non English comment.
I was referring to your comment that "A top human chess player output is exceptional."
What makes that so?  Top humans memorize moves and positions from others games and replay them in their own games.  How is that exceptional?  Why is it limited to a few dozen games every year from "important tournaments"?  When top humans memory runs dry they are forced to try to come up with something on their own.  Sometimes they get lucky and find a nice combo that works.  My point was that reproducing humans moves  with a computer is not desirable since computers play better moves.
Parent - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2007-06-29 18:48

Your view is pitifully simplistic...and dead on.  You are stating bald-faced truths that 99% of the chess public does NOT want to hear.  Basically chess has come down to "abandon all human vanity ye who enter here."  The machines are SO superior to humans now that now even a high school dropout with rudimentary reasoning ability can clearly see the essential truth of the situation!  (And by the way, don't be intimidated by the Latin phrases, he doesn't know how to spell them.  Assiduus usus uni rei deditus et ingenium et artem saepe vincit.)
Parent - - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-06-29 14:22
Actually, a "Rybka's Best Games" collection could be interesting.

For the most part, though, words are overrated when it comes to chess. Good moves and games speak for themselves.

Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-06-29 16:36
A tree diagram showing refutations of alternative lines would speak even louder IMHO. I hope that this will be added to the gui/engine at some point.

Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-07-01 15:53
Actually, Victor has asked me to add to Rybka a hash probe command. I'm not sure what he's planning but it might be good news for you. :)

Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-06-29 17:09
Vas I believe you are assuming we all can understand the moves/games simply by looking at them.  We are not all Masters.   I do admit I enjoy the beauty of some of the games even though I'm sure I don't understand all the moves.  I think it may be the fact that I don't understand them that makes them beautiful to me. 
Ignorance is bliss?
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-07-01 15:54
You understand them intuitively :)

Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Why is this .... ?

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill