Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 05:00:37 01/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 30, 2003 at 04:51:10, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On January 30, 2003 at 03:07:35, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >I hope you realize how jealous your statement sounds, apart from reality that no >program ever was and for now not will be at top GM level. I did not say this. I don't know what you read and if you dream so much. I said that I think we can win the match not that we are stronger. Are you able to understand my (bad) english? > >I am not even watching the games too much from kasparov-junior because kasparov >can even toy with it by playing openings which are not having any theoretic >relevance which makes the match IMHO irrelevant from my viewpoint, but >definitely it is a good thing for the big audience. Me too. > >Now you claim 2 things > a) you can do better against kasparov No, again you are interpretating my words the way you want. I said I think a have a way to do better. Can I believe this? When I started to make openings book and you were a child, I though I could make an openings book which could win the World title (between programs). Well, I won it 3 times! What did you win? > b) indirectly that shredder won this world championship and not junior Never did. > >b is very misleading to post here by you. and with regard to a i don't give you >an inch of trust there. You are telling me that I am a layer more or less, but what did I say which is not correct that you can prove? Nothing. You can have your own opinions on anybody, but cannot offend people. WHO ARE YOU? WHO ARE YOU? > >No one believes you can do a better job there at all. In fact i have some very >rude statements from different openingsbook programmers with regard to a guy >called 'necchi'. Speak for yourself Pls. I will not go down to your level to comment this... > >I won't post them here. that would get outside of the discussion. But definitely >it doesn't qualify for: "brilliant openingsnovelties to surprise kasparov". Did I say this? This is what you understood. Wrong as everything. > >In fact Kasparov has already found out that by playing some weird sideline where >computer can make mistake in the center, that it will make a mistake there. > >Pretty weird knowing there is 100% easier methods to get a won position. ??????????????? I want to apology for the people reading this post. This is not my style and I am really suffering to write this way. Chess and computer chess has been my hobby for many years and to read these things is really depressing. Sandro > >>On January 29, 2003 at 23:14:02, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On January 29, 2003 at 15:40:00, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>> >>>At world champs 1999 when programs played GMs after the world champ which >>>shredder won, i was following the german comments. In german during the GM >>>versus computer games especially a certain chessbase paid commentator was saying >>>each 90 seconds: "i really believe that fritz was better this world championship >>>than shredder. Fritz earned to win it, it is much better". >>> >>>Somehow i get impression i am hearing the same type of marketing below here from >>>you. And that in the year 2003. Shame on you! >> >>Vincent, >> >>you are offending the people just because they make statements you do not >>believe in. >> >>Sorry, I am not saying I know everything (maybe you do?). I am only saying that >>based on 25 years computer experience and a lot of work I have made something >>which I believe can help a program to beat the strongest chess player. >> >>I did not say I am 100% sure Shredder will win. I said I believe we can win. >>THERE IS A HUGE DIFFERENCE or not? >> >>I do not think anybody can claim you know everything, so neither you. >> >>I have nothing to get shame of. >> >>I think you do! >> >>Sorry if I will not continuo to reply, but it seems timewaste... >> >>Sandro >>> >>>>On January 29, 2003 at 11:45:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 28, 2003 at 15:11:42, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 28, 2003 at 08:18:40, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On January 28, 2003 at 01:10:48, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On January 27, 2003 at 19:22:19, andrew tanner wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> There seems to be no basis for this belief other than DEEP BLUE and it's >>>>>>>>>legacy, which is a legacy of "the sky is falling" type of despair. If computers >>>>>>>>>continue to improve tactically, then GM's will learn from them and also improve >>>>>>>>>tactically. Man has always improved in everything he does. Accelerated rates of >>>>>>>>>improvement for chess computers with faster hardware or knowldege doesn't >>>>>>>>>automatically translate into wins against strong GM's. Bring it on. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -A.T. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Hi, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I do not agree. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I think with the right approch and a fast hardware Shredder can win the match >>>>>>>>also now if we were allowed to. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sandro Necchi >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Nonsense of course. Shredder is a too passive program for that. >>>>>> >>>>>>Well, cannot give info, but this is not true anymore... >>>>> >>>>>This is a contradiction. >>>> >>>>Well, you do make statements on what you know. >>>>I do on what you don't know. >>>> >>>> >>>>>I conclude falsum out of that. I conclude >>>>>out of that that it is too passive even when compared to DIEP, Fritz, >>>>>Yace, Gandalf, SOS, Pharaon, to perform at equal strength against humans. >>>> >>>>Well, it is not necessary true that to win against a human player it is >>>>necessary to play aggressive. >>>>It depends how strong you play the way you play. >>>>Very important is which openings you play and how good are the positions that >>>>arise from those openings for the program. I mean if the computer will >>>>understand them and play correctly. >>>>This is the real challenge as if the opening is not good enough for the program >>>>it would be enough that the opponent play a weaker move to put the program our >>>>of book and in trouble. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>Has nothing to do with how good shredder is in world champs. >>>> >>>>Of course. >>>> >>>>>It sits and waits there and opponents f' themselves and Shredder profits ( >>>>>junior sits too, but junior doing it in a way more active but anti positional >>>>>way). >>>>> >>>>>Shredder is easy to beat for a titled player who doesn't blunder away material. >>>> >>>> >>>>Well, what happen to the swiss team than? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>The others are a nightmare to beat because they play more active. >>>> >>>> >>>>If you kill them in the opening phase it will be a nighmare for the program... >>>> >>>>>Crafty lacks loads of knowledge, but it is at least also playing *active*; it >is in that respect also way harder to beat for a human than Shredder. >>>> >>>> >>>>I do not agree. Sorry. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>With the std. passive style I would agree with you but there are other way to >>>>>>change things... >>>>>>I have been studying this for years and I was with MChess the first one to beat >>>>>>a GM at long time controls. 6 games (GM Igor Efimov). >>>>>>It was M-Chess 6.5 running on a 200 MHz Pentium MMX >>>>>> >>>>>>Believe, I know what I am saying. >>>>> >>>>>M-chess is not comparable with Shredder. Mchess is based upon things like >>>>>mobility. Shredder isn't. If it is inside shredder mobility, it will be >having a >minor score. >>>> >>>>Yes, this is true, but it is also true that Shredder is stronger. >>>> >>>>>Not saying that this is worse from objective viewpoint, but for >>>>>sure is having less of an impact against humans. >>>> >>>>I do not agree. I think Shredder can do quite well. >>>>Since you seems to know everything, do you know what GMs Shredder M3 is? >>>> >>>>I am referring to this program on my statements. >>>> >>>>You do not? >>>> >>>>> >>>>>M-Chess didn't have that problem, though of course software from around 96-97 >is completely outdated by todays standards. >>>> >>>> >>>>OK, but running on a slow hardware (Pentium 166 / Pentium Pro. 200 MMX) with a >>>>special book prepared by me scored 2589 Elo points against human players out of >>>>19 games at long time controls (matches with games 1h time or longer for each >>>>player). >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Best regards, >>>>>>>Vincent >>>>>> >>>>>>Best regards >>>>>>Sandro >>>> >>>>Best regards >>>>Sandro
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.