Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 17:56:21 10/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2002 at 20:38:57, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On October 23, 2002 at 19:00:15, martin fierz wrote:
>
>>On October 23, 2002 at 15:16:39, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On October 23, 2002 at 14:54:09, martin fierz wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 23, 2002 at 11:26:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On October 23, 2002 at 05:08:11, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On October 22, 2002 at 17:29:53, martin fierz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>let's be clear. the kramnik guy was happy to receive
>>>>>>a million dollar in advance. Without much effort he played
>>>>>>a few moves and it was 3-1. Then everyone started complaining
>>>>>>that the match got no publicity and got no excitement.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>He then gives away a piece in a clear drawn position with
>>>>>>a 1b trick (1 check in between). That's bullet blunder level.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In fact i don't make such mistakes that much at bullet and
>>>>>>last time i made such a mistake at slow level was a year or
>>>>>>10 ago. Kramnik had plenty of time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>0% chance he didn't deliberately blunder there.
>>>>>
>>>>>I think that is a totally stupid statement to make. I can point out GM blunders
>>>>>in _every_ tournament I have watched online. I have seen them overlook a mate
>>>>>in 2. A hanging queen. You-name-it. Human GMs _do_ make mistakes. Not as
>>>>>often as non-GM players, but also far more often than "never".
>>>>
>>>>bob, of course human players make mistakes. but GM != GM. kramnik is way beyond
>>>>your average GM. i challenge you to find a tournament game ("normal" time
>>>>control, not rapid chess) by kramnik in the last 5 years where he made such a
>>>>blunder without time trouble. i'd be surprised if you found one :-)
>>>>(but i'd really like to know the answer to that one!)
>>>
>>>I don't have a large database of games to look over, so I am really not sure.
>>>My
>>>observation was based on actual live games being relayed from major human
>>>tournaments
>>>on ICC, where Crafty was giving online analysis to make spotting the blunders
>>>much easier.
>>>
>>>I saw one game where white hung a piece, black didn't notice, and on the next
>>>move white
>>>"corrected" things and the game continued. Had black took it was an instant
>>>loss for white.
>>>In another game, white made a move that forced him to give up a queen the next
>>>move or
>>>get mated in 2 moves. Very simple blunder. Both were 2650+ players at the
>>>time. I think
>>>one might have been Leko but I am not sure... This is not nearly as uncommon as
>>>it seems,
>>>and many blunders go unnoticed by the opponent, making them "silent blunders"
>>>that don't
>>>get noticed by anybody...
>>
>>please note that i am talking about kramnik, and about non-time-trouble. i
>>remember very clearly when karpov lost a piece against christiansen on move 10
>>with a simple check i think - very like kramnik now. why do i remember this?
>>because this position was published in *every* single chess magazine of the
>>world, saying: "look, karpov is only human too".
>>there is a HUGE difference between kasparov's blunder you qote (resigning a
>>drawn position) and the blunder kramnik made. i know that you are *by far* good
>>enough at chess to see that the difficulty level of these two blunders is miles
>>apart. one is a simple 3-ply search. the other is, as you wrote recently, a day
>>or so of analysis by a bunch of CCC members and their machines.
>>if kramnik had made a blunder of this magnitude in the last 5 years in a
>>tournament game, i'm pretty sure it would have been all over the chess magazines
>>and i would have seen it...
>>
>>the worst blunder in a world championship match i can remember is a bad rook
>>move (...Re8 or something like that) by karpov in one of his matches against
>>kasparov, which lost "on the spot", but that was much more than a 3-ply search,
>>and combined those two have probably played about 100 games.
>>
>>>So,
>>>IMHO, it just
>>>goes down as "yet another GM blunder, which _does_ happen from time to time."
>>of course this is quite possible. but you can look at say kramnik's last 500
>>classic tournament games and look how many times he blundered a piece that a
>>3-ply search would find. all i'm saying is that the fritz team hit the jackpot,
>>because normally kramnik would not make that kind of blunder even in an
>>80-game-match...
>>
>>aloha
>> martin
>
>
>I think there are two issues:
>
>(1) I don't know what the probability is that he would make a major blunder in
>an 8-game
>span. Probably very low. So, once again, serendipity strikes, this time in
>favor of the computer,
>where it often strikes in favor of the human. :)
>
>(2) It is more than possible that some of his mistakes have gone unnoticed,
>since I doubt many
>play over every game of his using a computer. But it would be interesting to
>get a file of (say)
>his last 100 games and sic a computer on them in "annotate" mode to see if it
>finds anything
>of interest... I have the computers to do this if someone has a set of games to
>check out...
I have used Fritz to do overnight analyses of GM games for more games than I can
count. [My bookcase has dozens of books with my floppy disks in the back cover
giving that analysis.] At some point along the way, I came to the belief that
finding what the computer calls the "second best" move is often the best move.
In openings, the computer may not find the best move at all without some
assistance from the human operator.
It takes a lot of work to analyze GM games, even if you have the World's best
chess engines to help. It's necessary to look at second best and sometimes
third and fourth best. In fact, sometimes I find moves just by relying on my
own intuition [at the USCF Class A level!] and then confirming using the
computer. [In the opening, it's also necessary to use CB8 or it's equivalent to
suggest candidate moves.]
It has also been painfully pointed out to me that sometimes computer analyses
give completely wrong evaluations!
Chess engines have a LONG way to go before they will be sophisticated analysis
tools.
Bob D.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.