Author: Sune Larsson
Date: 08:11:54 06/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2005 at 11:01:50, Madhavan wrote:
>On June 20, 2005 at 10:59:54, Sune Larsson wrote:
>
>>On June 20, 2005 at 10:47:43, Madhavan wrote:
>>
>>>On June 20, 2005 at 10:42:53, Sune Larsson wrote:
>>>
>>>>On June 20, 2005 at 10:13:55, Madhavan wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>This guy claims Adams can beat hydra,he has produced enough nonsense in his
>>>>>article to chessbase,since we all know that match is probably going to end in a
>>>>>draw either by match fixing or playing few game and later gambling it to equal
>>>>>score.
>>>>>
>>>>>In any case Hydra is favourite.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Nonsense? Why so disrespectful - and just how do you read his article? I find
>>>>this:
>>>>
>>>>"...he *might* achieve a *draw*, that means 3:3. **Maybe** he can even beat
>>>>Hydra, if..."
>>>
>>>
>>>I havent read the whole article as I just noticed some headlines and a few
>>>description.
>>>
>>>subject title is all that matters,clearly claims "Adams can beat Hydra" instead
>>>of 3:3
>>>
>>>see the subject title later the content.
>>
>>
>> So, do you think this subject title comes from GM Nickel - or from Chessbase?
>>
>> "Before you make a move you must learn to sometimes sit on your hands..."
>
>It comes from you,thats how you were doing.
Right - and the subject title you were refering to like this:
"subject title is all that matters,clearly claims "Adams can beat Hydra" instead
of 3:3
see the subject title later the content."
Do you think the subject title you are refering to comes from
GM Nickel - or from ChessBase?
/S
>
>> /S
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>/S
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2462
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Some deficits of Hydra were also seen in the recent PÂL/CSS-Freestyle Tournament
>>>>>on playchess.com, where the sea monster didn't even reach the quarter finals.
>>>>>
>>>>>Nickel: Well, this is of course a hot potato since Hydra as in correspondence
>>>>>chess had to play against strong players, amongst them even some FIDE
>>>>>grandmasters who could use engines as in "advanced chess". I was also surprised
>>>>>by Hydra's failure, but on consideration I realised that all programs including
>>>>>Shredder 9, Fritz 8 and Junior 9 which were also running on strong machines, got
>>>>>into trouble, when playing without human advice. Probably this wouldn't have
>>>>>happened with shorter time limits, let's say 15 minute games or even shorter,
>>>>>but in one hour games (one hour per player plus 15 sec. per move), human chess
>>>>>competence can already show its qualities in tandem with engines. By the way, I
>>>>>also participated in this very interesting event and didn't manage to reach the
>>>>>quarter finals either. However in the process I met Hydra again and played a
>>>>>nice game which was drawn after 102 moves. The sea monster must have gotten
>>>>>tired of attacking my fortress without success.
>>>>>
>>>>>Once again what is your bet on the match Hydra-Adams...?
>>>>>
>>>>>Nickel: Okay, it will very hard for any human being, but as I always hold on for
>>>>>humanity, and especially as Michael Adams is a gifted positional player, I think
>>>>>he might achieve a draw, that means 3:3. Maybe he can even beat Hydra, if he is
>>>>>able to completely control his emotions and avoid any unclear complications.
>>>>>Should this be so, he could succeed where Kasparov failed when playing Deep Blue
>>>>>eight years ago. This would mean that humans have learned since then even though
>>>>>the computers didn't get weaker, but obviously stronger since that time. Hydra,
>>>>>don't forget, is supposed to be stronger than good old Deep Blue!
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.