Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:54:38 10/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 24, 2002 at 03:50:46, Uri Blass wrote:
i hope you realize bob will never do this test.
if he would do such tests he would not write down
such nonsense here.
>On October 24, 2002 at 03:06:40, martin fierz wrote:
>
>>On October 23, 2002 at 23:56:39, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On October 23, 2002 at 23:33:43, martin fierz wrote:
>>>
>>>>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. :)
>>>>
>>>>yes, i guess that is true...
>>>>
>>>>>(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.
>>>>i doubt that "many" do this, but one person per game is enough - to find 3-ply
>>>>losers!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> 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 can get you 100 kramnik games if you like - i "only" have the big2000 database
>>>>of chessbase, but i can get you the 100 last kramnik games in there that and
>>>>send them to you by email - does that sound ok? i'll just take the last 100 (and
>>>>remove anything that looks like blitz or rapid), other than that i will not
>>>>select anything, so as not to bias the outcome of the experiment.
>>>>
>>>>aloha
>>>> martin
>>>
>>>
>>>Fine by me.
>>>
>>>For some specifics. I will run these on quad 550's using 4 processors. What
>>>would be a
>>>decent time per move to annotate the games? IE I probably shouldn't search too
>>>long if we
>>>are looking for relatively simple blunders.
>>>
>>>Maybe we should define "relatively simple blunders" in some precise way? IE I
>>>need two
>>>things: (1) time per move; (2) threshold between the move played and the best
>>>move according
>>>to the computer to trigger an "aha!" comment...
>>>
>>>suggestions???
>>
>>hi bob,
>>
>>i've sent you the pgn with 184 kramnik games from 1997-1999 - he already had a
>>2750 rating back then. my suggestion would be 1s/move and 1.5 pawns. i don't
>>think more time is necessary than 1 second, since we are talking about 3-ply
>>blunders - actually 1ms would suffice for that :-)
>>but i'd also be interested if there were a bit less obvious big errors, so 1
>>second should be fine. it depends a bit on how long you want to bog your machine
>>down with this - 40 moves * 200 games = 8000 positions to check, with 10s/move
>>it would take a full day. the threshold would have to be at least a pawn, but
>>not 3, as you can usually still get a pawn for a piece if you blunder it.
>>
>>once you have run the test we'll have to look at all positions which crafty
>>pinpoints to see whether e.g. kramnik just missed a mate in 7 but won all the
>>same with a more human approach,
>
>
>Part of this can be done automatically by a computer(if the score after the
>blunder is more than +3 for kramnik or the score before the blunder is more than
>3 pawns against kramnik then a program that checks for blunders can decide that
>the moves are not blunders.
>
>Uri
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.