< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 40 OF 40 ·
|May-18-09|| ||swordfish: Congrats to Nakamura for a well-deserved victory. Onischuk's shared second is similarly no surprise, but|
[whatthefat: Outrageous performance by Hess!]
Yeah, I don't think anyone gave a young New Yorker a realistic chance to finish just a half-point out of first. He's got a bright future!
As for Kamsky, he just drew too many games, a tournament strategy not well suited to Swiss-system events.
|May-18-09|| ||Marmot PFL: Kamsky never seemed in any danger of losing a game (in games i saw) but failed to cash in on what seemed to be some promising positions. Nakamura, on the other hand was in trouble in 2 or 3 games but held on and seized on all opportunities. In a top class round robin Kamsky would get my vote but Nakamura's play is very well suited for the Swiss system.|
|May-18-09|| ||Nimzonick: Congrats Nakamura! An exciting tournament|
|May-18-09|| ||keypusher: <San Sebastian - 16th June 2009 >|
My wife's birthday! "Honey, I have a wonderful idea for a romantic getaway...."
Also the 105th anniversary of Bloomsday, i think.
|May-18-09|| ||kb2ct: |
<parmetd: Nakamura's second is a master from TX called Kris Littlejohn.>
Thank you. I tried to catch the name, but it isn't easy to understand Jennifer Schade. She does a good job playing straight man to Sutovsky, but hardly a radio voice.
<In the media room Kris Littlejohn Nakamura's second, "i'm not dissapointed" with the current position on the board. Things are looking good for Nakamura.>
|May-18-09|| ||adair10: Shahade did a superb job for fans in my opinion. I attended last two rounds and while spent most of the time in the playing hall in the second floor, sometimes would run to basement to hear what Sutovsky had to say about games. He is of course very knowledgable, but it was Shahade who would discuss consequences of some obvious (sometimes wrong) moves that many in that room were wondering about. But boy, she is loud.
BTW, setup was excellent. There was a big screen behind commentators with a specific game they were talking about with Sutovsky showing possible continuations. Also, plenty of food and drinks for everybody (not only commentators).|
|May-18-09|| ||karoaper: Shahade's voice reminds me of the stereotypical vacuous California blond voice <"Like, totally ...">, but in her case very smart and knowledgeable things were coming out of her mouth, as opposed to the mindless banter that one would associate with that voice.|
|May-18-09|| ||parmetd: actually adiar10, I found all those stupid moves she discussed annoying. It was always obvious why they were wrong and prevented them from analyzing real moves most of the time. What happens if I hang piece? You mean i'm just down a piece? I don't believe you! Like no way like I can't possibley make this horrible blunder like really?|
|May-18-09|| ||turbo231: <timhortons> It's rybka2.3.2a the program that won the 2008 world cumputer championship.Please tell if that's not true.Rybka3 is only a few elo points stronger.I've looked for the match between akobian and rybka3 but i can not find it.Please grace me with your knowledge and tell me where the match is recorded i would love to download it.I'm serious.Also i would love to see the match between rybka3 and nakamura.If you want to see a funny game watch nakamura beat crafty in 155 moves!Nakamura is hard on computers!One more thing nakamura said he played a 20 game match with kamsky @ icc and scored 18.5 points against him.I saw and heard nakamura say that on video,during the open championship.|
|May-19-09|| ||timhortons: <turbo231> chessgames.com seldom include icc blitz game in the database.Maybe the reason nakamura game against transwarp/rybka 3 and crafty got included here because of the funny nature it was played.|
I post the pgn of akobian transwarp game in akobians page.Scroll down and check the pgn of scorpion83 v transwarp on the link.
Rybka 2 has a bug that nakamura exploited well in blitz game at icc only him do it well though anton kovalyov come close to him and copy what he do.
Rybka 3 is improved version and i know nakamura never beat it since it play at icc blitz .IM kaufman at icc challenge Naka to play rybka 3 in a formal match but naka didnt reply to it.
|May-19-09|| ||timhortons: <turbo231>If theres something else drop me a note in my forum so we dont go off topic here.|
|May-19-09|| ||blacksburg: <Nakamura is hard on computers!>|
many people seem to be unaware that despite the 2 nakamura wins over rybka in this database, there are <hundreds> of rybka wins over nakamura that are not. transwarp destroys everyone, including nakamura.
|May-19-09|| ||turbo231: <timhortons> <blacksburg> Thank you but what about the rybka3 and nakamura match i want to see that too, if all possible|
|May-19-09|| ||blacksburg: i don't think you're going to see Rybka 3 in a serious match with any human player any time soon, including nakamura. there's just nothing for any player to gain from getting annihilated by a computer.|
|May-19-09|| ||turbo231: I think nakamura has a better chance playing a blitz game with rybka|
|May-19-09|| ||whatthefat: <turbo123>
Not really. He, like everybody else, gets thrashed on average at that time control too.
|May-19-09|| ||grasser: <sisyphus> Yes I don't compete anymore, but not by choice. I am on SSI disability since 2003 and cannot afford my USCF dues as food is a daily struggle. I teach kids at the local library and I put a tip jar out, but after three years of doing that I think I have received less than $10!
People have given me cat food, so my cats are fed, but not me! Go figure? I guess I need to develop a taste for Friskies. :)|
|May-19-09|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: Absolutely. The time when a straight up man vs. machine match made sense has passed.|
The only thing I think might be interesting now would be a match between one of the very best players in the world and a program where the human player received full draw odds (if the player either draws or wins, he receives one point and the program gets nothing). At this point, a program like Rybka 3 would likely still be favored, but I think a few guys have some chances in such a match.
|May-19-09|| ||Shams: <SetNoEscapeOn>
My opinion: the natural extension of the man v. machine chess battle is a Grandmaster against chess engine that runs on its own, without tablebases or opening books. Analytical power vs. accumulated knowledge. That would swing things back to humans for a good while, and be more interesting for spectators.
|May-19-09|| ||timhortons: <turbo231> I think nakamura has a better chance playing a blitz game with rybka.|
Nakamura could get 1 draw in every 20 losses against rybka 2 and seldom win.But people keep on observing it during the time because its entertaining to watch, even magnus carlsen and the rest of the gms are watching it.pstat transwarp smallville at icc.
Chessgames.com should specify for the record that its rybka 2 because that game in the databse makes people think that naka is better than rybka whos software keep on improving each time.
No chance for naka to win against rybka 3 since transwarp upgrade his software.Naka never win once.
<Who among the GM do you think would play transwarp 4 who are running on 52 core?>
|May-19-09|| ||blacksburg: <Who among the GM do you think would play transwarp 4 who are running on 52 core?>|
heck, i'll play the monster. i'd probably get the same results as any GM anyways.
|May-19-09|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: <Shams>
I agree, that should give the humans a much better chance. However, I wonder how interesting the games themselves would be. If the human wins, it would likely be due to either just a won position from the opening or a hilarious blunder by the computer in the endgame.
On the other hand, I guess one could argue that computer victories over humans now are usually just a case of a human missing some hidden but vital detail in their calculation, or a mindless one move blunder. That can also only be so interesting.
I should also mention that some time ago on uschess.org Joel Benjamin argued that computers probably don't even need an opening book now:
I'm not sure how accurate his ideas are because I haven't seen any games where it has been tried. Intuitively I agree with you but maybe we are wrong.
|May-19-09|| ||SetNoEscapeOn: <Anatoly21: For such a large number of players, I really wish they had more than 9 rounds. It just seems far too short to be a good judge of who is the best in the US, even though Nakamura did demonstrate a great performance.>|
Well, this was actually the smallest US Championship field in several years. 24 players in a nine round swiss really makes it feel much more like a round robin. Just look at Nakamura's opponents; he played just one non-grandmaster (an in-form Brooks) in round 8.
|May-19-09|| ||Jim Bartle: Or how about four groups of six, with the winner advancing to a semi-final of two game matches?|
I know, I know, you would almost automatically get ties in the groups after only five games, forcing rapid playoffs.
But group round robins in some form are a good idea. Maybe three groups of eight, plus a "wild card."
|May-19-09|| ||Brown: <timhortons<IM kaufman at icc challenge Naka to play rybka 3>> |
That's hilarious! Someone please tell IM Kaufman that I challenge Kaufman to fight my killer robot.
Oh, and I also challenge Kaufman to share his recent Senior Chess Champion victory with GM Suba, who was robbed. He could have been a gentleman and split the title, but seemed uninterested in this move.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 40 OF 40 ·