Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / "BEST" hope for humans against Rybka or computer programs
Poll
Whos creativity can beat Rybka in a 10 or 20 game match... (Closed)
| Anand Viswanathan | 7 | 9% | |
| Topalov Veselin | 3 | 4% | |
| Kramnik Vladimir | 11 | 14% | |
| Ivanchuk Vassily | 1 | 1% | |
| Morozevich Alexander | 4 | 5% | |
| Mamedyarov Shakhriyar | 2 | 3% | |
| Leko Peter | 2 | 3% | |
| Aronian Levon | 2 | 3% | |
| Radjabov Teimour | 1 | 1% | |
| Carlsen Magnus | 1 | 1% | |
| King Kasparov if he was still active | 15 | 19% | |
| Bobby Fischer if he was still active | 11 | 14% | |
| No One | 18 | 23% |
Friends ...
GM Ehlvest has tried his best...but a draw or lot of draws doesn't satisfy our "victory-thirsty" mind!
So the curious question for me is...
who among these do you think can can deliver "power-blows" against Rybka or Computer programs in general?
Or who you would love to see in next Rybka vs GM Match!
1 Anand, Viswanathan 2792
2 Topalov, Veselin 2769
3 Kramnik, Vladimir 2769
4 Ivanchuk, Vassily 2762
5 Morozevich, Alexander 2758
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar 2757
7 Leko, Peter 2751
8 Aronian, Levon 2750
9 Radjabov, Teimour 2746
or our sweetheart...
17 Carlsen, Magnus 2710 !!!
GM Ehlvest has tried his best...but a draw or lot of draws doesn't satisfy our "victory-thirsty" mind!
So the curious question for me is...
who among these do you think can can deliver "power-blows" against Rybka or Computer programs in general?
Or who you would love to see in next Rybka vs GM Match!
1 Anand, Viswanathan 2792
2 Topalov, Veselin 2769
3 Kramnik, Vladimir 2769
4 Ivanchuk, Vassily 2762
5 Morozevich, Alexander 2758
6 Mamedyarov, Shakhriyar 2757
7 Leko, Peter 2751
8 Aronian, Levon 2750
9 Radjabov, Teimour 2746
or our sweetheart...
17 Carlsen, Magnus 2710 !!!
By Michael Waesch
Date 2007-07-09 13:16
No one. Engines, especially Rybka are too strong.
Mike
Mike
Ohh Michael my dear...
Don't be so pessimistic...Just watch out following games...in case you don't!
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1465245
Still then do you feel they have no chance!
Don't be so pessimistic...Just watch out following games...in case you don't!
http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1465245
Still then do you feel they have no chance!
By Michael Waesch
Date 2007-07-09 15:29
I am only realistic. I didn´t live on the moon the last couple of years like some guys here. The results of past man vs machine matches were all unanimously in total fovar of the machines - even years before Rybka only was a glimmer in the eye of its programmer.
The aera when man ruled in chess is over! Just start to accept it! It´s over! Not after Kramnik and not after Ehlvest! It´s been over for years now!
Mike
The aera when man ruled in chess is over! Just start to accept it! It´s over! Not after Kramnik and not after Ehlvest! It´s been over for years now!
Mike
All mathematical aspects or say searching in trees is over...there is no question of acceptance thats fact
...But still ...but still
what @ the creative aspects of the game...
What is your opinion upon this!
Priya
...But still ...but still
what @ the creative aspects of the game...
What is your opinion upon this!
Priya
By Michael Waesch
Date 2007-07-09 17:32
Chess has been so perverted by commerce that there is no longer such a thing like creativity.
Points = Money, so any "titled" player will go any way to a fast and safe point. He won´t take any risk or squander any thought about creativity unless it may serve his purpose for very fast getting his money cheque ...
Just look at your databases ...
1. e4 2. e5
Draw? Draw! Now let´s get a cup of coffee and our money cheque!
Mike
Points = Money, so any "titled" player will go any way to a fast and safe point. He won´t take any risk or squander any thought about creativity unless it may serve his purpose for very fast getting his money cheque ...
Just look at your databases ...
1. e4 2. e5
Draw? Draw! Now let´s get a cup of coffee and our money cheque!
Mike
Well, if you are realistic, you explain me how come, the last Freestyle, has
defeated Vas. and has not won Missioncontrol, that played with 16 cores?
And if you look at the games,(of the Freestyle) Mission control has lost some of them after little moved by the opening. A game the lost one to the 26° move.
And then you looks at the game between Rybka and Shredder10 (last championship world PC), won by Rybka without going out from the book. Book of openings obviously prepared by a human teacher.
It also looks at the game Topalov_Shirov Linares 1998. In one written test of mine in past in this forum, a consumer with a quadcore, has succeeded only in finding the winning movement of Shirov, but in 8 hours!! I believe that surely Shirov in game
has employed less time.
I believe that you more than realist you are a romantic impassioned of engine... but deluded.
defeated Vas. and has not won Missioncontrol, that played with 16 cores?
And if you look at the games,(of the Freestyle) Mission control has lost some of them after little moved by the opening. A game the lost one to the 26° move.
And then you looks at the game between Rybka and Shredder10 (last championship world PC), won by Rybka without going out from the book. Book of openings obviously prepared by a human teacher.
It also looks at the game Topalov_Shirov Linares 1998. In one written test of mine in past in this forum, a consumer with a quadcore, has succeeded only in finding the winning movement of Shirov, but in 8 hours!! I believe that surely Shirov in game
has employed less time.
I believe that you more than realist you are a romantic impassioned of engine... but deluded.
This is a game of the world ending 1972. (the game attached to the present one).
The three movements (18°,20°,22°) of the white, they are described in the books as notable and very strong. Do the engines find these movements?
How do they behave in the analysis of this position.?
The three movements (18°,20°,22°) of the white, they are described in the books as notable and very strong. Do the engines find these movements?
How do they behave in the analysis of this position.?
Attachment: FischerSp2.pgn (879B)
Hi priyanvada ,
playing against human is a different thing while playing against computer you cannot use the same tactics. Computers are both tactically and positionally strong , and the programmers add lot of stuff in it to calculate threats and threats after some plies.
playing against human is a different thing while playing against computer you cannot use the same tactics. Computers are both tactically and positionally strong , and the programmers add lot of stuff in it to calculate threats and threats after some plies.
Carlsen-Rybka would sure be interesting. I guess his schedule is pretty tight-packed with the rather large amount of media attention he's receiving, though. :-)
/* Steinar */
/* Steinar */
Okay, I voted for Anand. I'll be glad to host him here for a match with Rybka anytime! Now, will you put up the half-million dollars, please?
Think Again ... You will surely lose those dollars!
Hi Priyanvada,
Okay! Here is what is needed to be done. Firstly, you must find Dr. Victor Von Frankenstein; I believe he is running around some place in Transylvania.
Next, secure medical releases from Kasparov, Kramnik and Fischer.
Once you have done that and found Heir Doctor Von Frankenstein -undoubtedly he will need a castle some place in Barvaria.
When you receive a phone call from the then mad Heir Doctor, who should be heard saying something to the effect, " It's alive, it's alive,...it's alive I tell you."
Contact Vas and have him put up $100,000 against Kaskramfischer The King Shark Of Transylvania vs Rybka.
Okay! Here is what is needed to be done. Firstly, you must find Dr. Victor Von Frankenstein; I believe he is running around some place in Transylvania.
Next, secure medical releases from Kasparov, Kramnik and Fischer.
Once you have done that and found Heir Doctor Von Frankenstein -undoubtedly he will need a castle some place in Barvaria.
When you receive a phone call from the then mad Heir Doctor, who should be heard saying something to the effect, " It's alive, it's alive,...it's alive I tell you."
Contact Vas and have him put up $100,000 against Kaskramfischer The King Shark Of Transylvania vs Rybka.
Hey, man! I get 15% ( by the way, if any one complains, tell them the good Doc has to publish something to keep his seat at the U. You know what I mean right, nod nod wink wink.)
You ah wouldn't have any hot tips as to who might be running at Belmont wouldjah!
You ah wouldn't have any hot tips as to who might be running at Belmont wouldjah!
Every time...
You speak out so energetically
Where do you get this energy from?
warm regards
Priyanvada
You speak out so energetically
Where do you get this energy from?
warm regards
Priyanvada
Hi Priyanvada,
Very simple-I'm crazy!
Regards,
Robert
Very simple-I'm crazy!
Regards,
Robert
Ohh Robert....
Thats great reply...May someday i might see you flying in sky with (or without wings)...
May someday god give enough power to wrestle out with Sharks and nor with Rybka's like me!
Anyway,,,thanks for reply.
I always felt Each of your word as raw and transparent not a polished one!
regards
Priya
Thats great reply...May someday i might see you flying in sky with (or without wings)...
May someday god give enough power to wrestle out with Sharks and nor with Rybka's like me!
Anyway,,,thanks for reply.
I always felt Each of your word as raw and transparent not a polished one!
regards
Priya
Not true-I use a great deal of spell check editing, and grammatical clean up. ( I am a fanatical "nut" ). Uh, you do have me flying around an awful lot.
by the by
Not that I mind flying around!
Robert
by the by
Not that I mind flying around!
Robert
I firmly believe that if anyone on that list employs the exact strategies of Ernest F., M.D. Pecci in his book ISBN-10: 1929331045
then they would easily win a match. This just my opinion and gut feeling. Which is incredibly backed up by the fact that when Kasparov and Kramnik employed
a similar strategy they easily won (with Kasparov utterly embarrassing Fritz). Why they employed the strategy only once is beyond me. Maybe they were playing for
the fans and probably felt desperate when they did employ such strategy. Either that or they made a deal with the author to not play this way.
then they would easily win a match. This just my opinion and gut feeling. Which is incredibly backed up by the fact that when Kasparov and Kramnik employed
a similar strategy they easily won (with Kasparov utterly embarrassing Fritz). Why they employed the strategy only once is beyond me. Maybe they were playing for
the fans and probably felt desperate when they did employ such strategy. Either that or they made a deal with the author to not play this way.
You made me curious,..
Whats this strategy...please explain sir
Priya
Whats this strategy...please explain sir
Priya
Ummh! Sounds a bit screwy-why didn't the author become world chess champion by using his own method? This is where people get lost.
A person uses a method until they can learn to develop their own expression.
When a person performs any task- the method that they have cultivated should be so sublimated, and cultivated into the totality of the experience being expressed, in the execution of their art, that the whole of their being is subject to its expression.
Am I making my self clear here?
A person uses a method until they can learn to develop their own expression.
When a person performs any task- the method that they have cultivated should be so sublimated, and cultivated into the totality of the experience being expressed, in the execution of their art, that the whole of their being is subject to its expression.
Am I making my self clear here?
h1a8,
You helped make a payment on this guys mercedes! When that money could have gone toward a future computer component. Shame on you!
You helped make a payment on this guys mercedes! When that money could have gone toward a future computer component. Shame on you!
Ha Ha! Hi Robert.
Yes I probably did (But unintentionally).
Anyway, I was just very much hoping that GMs would read it and use it against these monsters.
Yes I probably did (But unintentionally).
Anyway, I was just very much hoping that GMs would read it and use it against these monsters.
It takes advantage of a chess computer's weakness (or blind spots), which is that they are weak (and seemingly stupid) in closed/locked positions.
As far as the strategy goes, It locks the board up in a certain type of way, called a barrage position. The computer then uselessly shuffles its pieces while you then slowly build up an attack on the kingside by setting up the artillery behind the soon to be open lines and then by opening up these lines by pawn storming or pawn break(with mostly a pawn or piece sac or two). When the computer finds out what is going on its too late. I believe one's tactics has two be at least 1900 level (and probably 2000 for rybka) for this strategy to work. This is just my opinion though. One could just very well just need 1800 level tactic ability instead (or even 2100level).
The reason the strategy is not quite working for me is that I am either too weak (around 1600 now) or too lazy (didn't read whole book yet). I even managed to create some barrage positions against the engine without blundering several times (mostly I blunder though). But how to orchestrate the attack is where I'm lacking (My tactics are just too unsound). But with the hands of a GM then its a cakewalk. Just look at that game Kasparov played against X3D fritz to even up the score. He used a similar but somewhat different strategy here. And that was the only game where he employed such strategy. I wonder why (including Kramnik)?
The book is mostly games though with some instruction. The author shows how to create barrage positions from several different openings and with variations (with both black and white).
Hey I thought it was screwy too, until I achieved my first barrage position against the computer and saw the way kasparov utterly embarrassed Fritz with a similar strategy.
As far as the strategy goes, It locks the board up in a certain type of way, called a barrage position. The computer then uselessly shuffles its pieces while you then slowly build up an attack on the kingside by setting up the artillery behind the soon to be open lines and then by opening up these lines by pawn storming or pawn break(with mostly a pawn or piece sac or two). When the computer finds out what is going on its too late. I believe one's tactics has two be at least 1900 level (and probably 2000 for rybka) for this strategy to work. This is just my opinion though. One could just very well just need 1800 level tactic ability instead (or even 2100level).
The reason the strategy is not quite working for me is that I am either too weak (around 1600 now) or too lazy (didn't read whole book yet). I even managed to create some barrage positions against the engine without blundering several times (mostly I blunder though). But how to orchestrate the attack is where I'm lacking (My tactics are just too unsound). But with the hands of a GM then its a cakewalk. Just look at that game Kasparov played against X3D fritz to even up the score. He used a similar but somewhat different strategy here. And that was the only game where he employed such strategy. I wonder why (including Kramnik)?
The book is mostly games though with some instruction. The author shows how to create barrage positions from several different openings and with variations (with both black and white).
Hey I thought it was screwy too, until I achieved my first barrage position against the computer and saw the way kasparov utterly embarrassed Fritz with a similar strategy.
Hi h1a8,
It certainly puts the game on a mechanical footing-and in that respect some of the life of the game goes out of it for a GM who has spent most of his life playing against people and not a computer. The mentality is certainly different and probably not an issue for today's generational chess players. But for those who have come from a history of playing predominantly people- for them this may feel lifeless, dry and unappealing- this might also be the reason why they are always losing because they continue to approach chess from a person vs person perspective and not machine vs person perspective- In short, they aren't playing the tricks on the computer-they are playing chess.
regards,
Robert
It certainly puts the game on a mechanical footing-and in that respect some of the life of the game goes out of it for a GM who has spent most of his life playing against people and not a computer. The mentality is certainly different and probably not an issue for today's generational chess players. But for those who have come from a history of playing predominantly people- for them this may feel lifeless, dry and unappealing- this might also be the reason why they are always losing because they continue to approach chess from a person vs person perspective and not machine vs person perspective- In short, they aren't playing the tricks on the computer-they are playing chess.
regards,
Robert
Kasparov only employed that strategy once against Fritz because only once did Fritz play an opening variation that made it easy to employ. A suitable opening book should foil this strategy pretty well, I think.
You have to get the right position.
The 'close-the-position-at-all-costs' approach has been dead since game 2 of Kasparov-Deep Blue II.
Vas
The 'close-the-position-at-all-costs' approach has been dead since game 2 of Kasparov-Deep Blue II.
Vas
Hi,
after that I have seen in the match I would have add Ehlvest and Kamsky to that list. :-).
Do not forget that both were in the top and are from the old good school not influenced by computers.
The matches Kramnik - Fritz, Kasparov - Junior, Bareev - Hiarcs all finished by the draw 3:3 and in my opinion has been arranged for marketing purposes.
The match Rybka - Ehlvest looks like real one, it is the good exception.
Regards
Hetman
after that I have seen in the match I would have add Ehlvest and Kamsky to that list. :-).
Do not forget that both were in the top and are from the old good school not influenced by computers.
The matches Kramnik - Fritz, Kasparov - Junior, Bareev - Hiarcs all finished by the draw 3:3 and in my opinion has been arranged for marketing purposes.
The match Rybka - Ehlvest looks like real one, it is the good exception.
Regards
Hetman
I voted for Morozevich.
Though i think that his creativity and style fits better against humans, not engines ;)
Though i think that his creativity and style fits better against humans, not engines ;)
Anand is my favorite player, however how can you not vote for Kasp? His preparation is unparalleled.
I don,t think Kasparov is a good choice (don,t get me wrong he a proven himself a great champion) because hes inclined to get angry and frustrated if he loses a game early, which is not whats wanted in a man- machine match.
He admitted that he was "not interested" in the final game of his 1997 Deep Blue match (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK0YOGJ58a0) thats not what sponsors or fans expect.
my choice is Capablanca in his best years, I know thats no good now but thats my choice.
He admitted that he was "not interested" in the final game of his 1997 Deep Blue match (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cK0YOGJ58a0) thats not what sponsors or fans expect.
my choice is Capablanca in his best years, I know thats no good now but thats my choice.
Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / "BEST" hope for humans against Rybka or computer programs
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill