< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 58 OF 59 ·
|Nov-02-10|| ||anandrulez: I think Kasparov would have retired if he was word champ actually , he did have some other interests outside chess - like Russian president .|
|Nov-02-10|| ||Kazzak: www.magnuscarlsen.com
Good thing his chess isn't as prone to errors as the "Norglish."
|Nov-02-10|| ||lostemperor: I read something funny at the chessbomb live chat. Two chess players were chatting at a Carlsen game in Nanjing. One player said to the other: "Carlsen looks like Justin Bieber!" Said the other: "Who is Justin Biber?" :)|
|Nov-02-10|| ||lostemperor: What is also striking is that Anand 40 and Carlsen 19, not coincidently #1 and 2 of the world, are known to have a photographic memory. A significant advantage. Learning new variations in hours instead of days. I don't know which other chess players, except for Morphy, have a photographic memory also? Anand could be playing top chess for a long time still.|
|Nov-02-10|| ||mkrk17: <lostemperor: What is also striking is that Anand 40 and Carlsen 19, not coincidently #1 and 2 of the world, are known to have a photographic memory. A significant advantage. Learning new variations in hours instead of days.>|
Your last two sentences contradict themselves. "Learning" new variations has got nothing to do with photographic memory. It might have something to do with "remembering" new variations, but i am sure it has nothing to do with "learning" new variations.
|Nov-02-10|| ||nimh: <And how exactly did they decide that in his 40 decisive games against Kasparov, Karpov played worse than "the average grandmaster"? That smacks of utter BS to me and calls the whole method into doubt.>|
They did not 'decide', it's the engine that said so. :)
Note also that decisive games usually have lower quality, since to have a decisive result either side has to make a mistake first.
Actually I'm as puzzled as many why it was necessary to make a distinction between results with decisive games included only and those with all games included.
|Nov-02-10|| ||lostemperor: <mkrkr17> right, remembering I mean.|
I hope I remember correctly Anand and Carlsen have photographic memory since I was looking where read it. Anybody knows for sure? Fischer probably had photographic memory too since he could reproduce every single move from a simultanuous display once even after some time.
|Nov-02-10|| ||plang: I suspect most strong GMs have unusual memoty skills. That is a useful tool but a great player needs a lot more than that. Koltanowski set the record for blindfold simultaneous exhibitions. He was a strong OTB player but not an elite one.|
|Nov-02-10|| ||The Rocket: <"Let's assume for a second that computers are strong enough to understand everything world champions have played and can judge them based on their inaccuracies. Well... something isn't right with that technique when it ranks Karpov as more accurate than Kasparov, despite Kasparov winning far more tournaments, getting a much higher rating, and beating Karpov in 5 consecutive matches. Clearly, the computers are missing something.">|
You seem to forget the fact that all of these misstakes kasparov makes which karpov does to a lesser extent is not as evident to a human being as it is to a 3200 elo engine.. in fact kasparovs more risky play though less acurate in theory can be harder to play against than anatolys more sound but less challeninging play, in particular when karpov had the black pieces compared to kasparov(who probably picked up aloth more points than karpov in that aspect)
Rybka is not the truth in chess.. the rybka analyzis is not the final word of the accuracys of world-champs.. if rybka did indeed know this for an answer then it would not lose any games.
when rybka loses a game it sometimes judges that the opponent made a misstake(somewhere in the middlegame) and rybka then plays to refute it. but the fact that the engine still loses games proves that it does not evalute errors and other factors flawlessly.
|Nov-02-10|| ||alexmagnus: <3200 elo engine>
3200 Elo is a myth. It's actually 3200 Swedish national rating. Or do you really think Rybka would beat Anand 9:1?
|Nov-02-10|| ||The Rocket: its 3200+ on this site as well.. and that has nothing to with the swedish site you are referring to|
<"do you really think Rybka would beat Anand 9:1?">
Would be really interesting to see!
Magnus carlsen for instance with his 2826 elo.. would he really beat fritz 8(2800) in a match? of course not.
|Nov-02-10|| ||rapidcitychess: <The Rocket>
The ELO sytem, devised by Arpad Elo, caculates to:
-200 = 25%
In English, that means some one 200 points below you hasa 25% chance of winning. Off the top of my head, 400 points goes to 17%, 600 goes to 9% and zips down to 1%. The upper ranges makes it harder to caculate, because it is almost a point of perfection, but perfection is impossible to achieve until ~30 piece tablebases. Then opening theory can be deemed to a couple exchanges and wind down to a draw.
Off the original subject, the number of positions in chess is ridiculuos. Uncaculable. Finite beings like us will not grasp it. Amazing.
And yet somehow people think that man is all-powerful.
|Nov-02-10|| ||Kaspablanca: lostemperor: Fischer also had a photographic memory, better that Anand`s and Carlsen`s.|
|Nov-02-10|| ||keypusher: <Kaspablanca: lostemperor: Fischer also had a photographic memory, better that Anand`s and Carlsen`s.>|
And Pillsbury's was better than Fischer's. And Morphy's was better than Pillsbury's. And [insert further meaningless, unprovable claims here].
|Nov-03-10|| ||siamesedream: <Magnus Carlsen`s Blog
Nanjing Pearl Spring 2010 finished -Tal WC Blitz n
Nanjing Pearl Spring 2010 finished, Tal WC Blitz next The early 10 am start of the last round of the Nanjing tournament didn't stop the players from showing excellent fighting spirit. Anand outplayed Bacrot with the white pieces to take clear second (with Bacrot clear third), while Wang Yue came very close to his first Nanjing victory. He outplayed Topalov, won a piece, but squandered it all in the time trouble and lost. I had white against Gashimov and didn't have much of an advantage from the opening. Allowing him to capture on e4, the position opened up and his queenside pawns on dark squares became vulnerable. He lost (or sacrificed) a pawn to gain counterplay on the kingside. I missed an opportunity to enter a promising rook and knight ending a pawn up, and instead he traded rooks to reach a drawn but somewhat tricky ending. The queens and opposite-colored-bishop-ending a pawn down proved manageable for him, especially after I wasted a tempo with Qc7+ and a draw was reached after 71 moves. Clear first with 7/10 and a 10 rating point gain made the tournament highly successful for me, and the 24 hours travel back home went smoothly. In many respects the Nanjing tournament was a top-level event of the absolute highest class and I'd like to thank the organizer for the great event. In November I look forward to the Tal Blitz World Championship 16th- 18th in Moscow as well as possibly some pleasant activities with my main sponsors Arctic Securities and Simonsen lawfirm. Finally I'm happy to present my brand new official website, www.magnuscarlsen.com. Hope you will check it out☺. Magnus Carlsen, Haslum, November 1st, 2010
|Nov-03-10|| ||lostemperor: <And Pillsbury's was better than Fischer's. And Morphy's was better than Pillsbury's. And [insert further meaningless, unprovable claims here].> why do you belittle comments on this subject. In chess it is ever more aimportant to have a photographic memory. Of course every top-player needs to have excellent memory today and it is never measured. But sometimes it is documented or backed by eye-witnesses. I found the article on Carlsen photographic memory http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... <Magnus' memory is said to be photographic. His coach did a little stunt for some journalists: on TV he showed the boy a diagram from a position in a chess book Magnus immediately replied which game it was, from which book, and roughly how it went. His father also has stories of five year old Magnus reciting the name, size and population of all the 430 counties in Norway. This ability is undoubtedly very useful when keeping up-to-date on modern opening theory. One might assume this has been vital when building up his amazing opening repertoire>|
|Nov-03-10|| ||alexmagnus: <In English, that means some one 200 points below you hasa 25% chance of winning. Off the top of my head, 400 points goes to 17%, 600 goes to 9% and zips down to 1%.>|
Don't know where you get those numbers but they are not true.
200 pts is indeed 1/4, 25%
To get each next 200 step you have to simply multiply with 1/4.
|Nov-03-10|| ||keypusher: <lost emperor> Of course it's not meaningless to say Carlsen or Anand or Fischer or Pillsbury have/had excellent memories and it helps their chess. It is meaningless to say Fischer's memory was better than Carlsen's or Anand's. We don't know, full stop.|
|Nov-03-10|| ||suplexer: only a few american or western chess fans would say fischer had better memory than kasparov, anand, carlsen etc.|
|Nov-03-10|| ||suplexer: This documentary from google video
http://video.google.com/videoplay?d... he can remember every variation and game he has ever looked at, and every phone number and street name.
|Nov-03-10|| ||visayanbraindoctor: Karpov also had a fantastic memory. I have read that when a biographer of his wanted to obtain lost score-sheets of games Karpov played as a child, Karpov simply provided the moves (of all the games he played as a child) from memory. |
Both Lasker and Capablanca have complained that they were troubled by their past games that kept on re-playing themselves in their minds, and wanted to forget them.
World Champions such a Steinitz and Alekhine were also simultaneous blindfold chess masters (at an era where the masters played without sight of opponent or board). In blindfold chess, the best ever is Alekhine. At present, the best blindfold chess master is probably Kramnik. One cannot play simultaneous blindfold chess without a good memory.
Morphy was another blindfold chess specialist. In addition, Morphy was said to have memorized dozens of law books word for word, cover to cover.
News describing Pillsbury playing simultaneous blindfold chess games, whist, while memorizing and reciting forwards and backwards dozens of random words are almost impossible to believe, yet are documented.
|Nov-03-10|| ||alexmagnus: But I'm sure the words were not too long... BTW reciting words backwards has nothing to do with memory, it's a special talent (both words backwards, word group backwards or words "phonetically backwards"). Similar to another special talent - to say number of letters in a word/sentence immediately. Those are unexplained.|
|Nov-03-10|| ||alexmagnus: BTW <visayan> you mix two things. Pillsbury played a blindfold simul while reciting a list of words, but not the list backwards. He was known for the talent to recite lists backwards but <reciting a list backwards during a blindfold simul> is not documented.|
|Nov-03-10|| ||alexmagnus: <Before his chess exhibitions he would do memory tricks: fifty numbered pieces of paper, each with a five-word sentence, would be given to him. He would read them and then drop them into a hat. Next having someone would draw them out, and call out the number one by one, Harry would rattle off the correct sentence. At the end, he would then recite each sentence backwards>|
So, it was not <during> the simul, but <before> it.
|Nov-03-10|| ||alexmagnus: So, Pillsbury did some memory tricks, and mythwriters decided to make it even more impressive and put it so as if he did all those tricks simultaneously. Apparently he didn't. Or did two tricks and the same time (blindfold simul+ list of words (only forward) or blindsfold simul + whist).|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 58 OF 59 ·