< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·
|Aug-09-09|| ||parisattack: <Sem: <Mulyahnto: Does that mean we'd have *solved* chess? That the perfectly played game is always a draw?> A very interesting question. The great Gyula Breyer once published the initial position with the caption 'A difficult position!'. Perhaps White is destined to win such a game, because of his extra half tempo. I would be interested, Mulyahnto, in any further thoughts you might have on this.>|
We will have to wait for 32 piece Table Bases! If Moore's Law hold's up I calculate 24-28 years.
My guess is chess draws out at around 3100-3200 ELO. If 200 ELO is a 'level' that means two more levels - and computers will be there in less than 20 years.
|Aug-10-09|| ||kevin86: A great finish... White WAS able to pull this one out late.|
The R+P vs N is not easy,maybe black should have played on.
|Oct-28-09|| ||payman23: I'm a beginner. Can someone please explain what's wrong with 57...Rxh5
|Oct-28-09|| ||suenteus po 147: <payman23> My guess is that after 57...Rxh5 58.Re6+ Kf7 59.Rxe5 Rf6 60.Rxd5 Rxf5 Carlsen can probably move into a very familiar position with his rook and pawn that is a well known endgame win.|
|Oct-28-09|| ||MagnumDefender: A Typical Grandmaster Struggle|
|Nov-20-09|| ||aazqua: Kasparov had a great deal of praise for Kramnik until he lost to him. Then he was grumpy for a while. Kasparov was not a guy who was content with losing.|
<Ishaan: I don't think Kasparov had a very great opinion of Topalov.
Kasparov on the contrary always praised for Kramnik and Anand, as far as I know.> You couldn't be more wrong! Garry always said that Topalov is one of the most creative players ever and had (after their match) not much good to say about Kramnik...
|Nov-20-09|| ||tamar: <payman23> One of the endgame K+P v K positions to learn is this one.|
Magnus saw that after 37...Rxh5 38 Re6+ Kf7 39 Rxe5 Kf6 40 Rxd5 Rxf5 41 Rxf5+ Kxf5
click for larger view
Now the important point is that White can get to b4, ahead of the pawn, at a moment when Black cannot play Kb6, which would be a draw.
42 Kc2 Ke5 43 Kc3 Kd5 44 Kb4 Kc6 45 Ka5 wins
|Nov-20-09|| ||Ulhumbrus: 17...Bd7 is more exact than 17...Be6 because then after 18 Nc7 Rc8 the White Knight lacks a target on e6.|
If Black wants to play the bishop to e6 and allow the capture Nxe6 he will not want the f7 pawn to be pinned, so as to preclude the recapture ..fxe6.
This suggests that an alternative to 16...Ke7 is 16..Kf8 17 Rg5 h6! 19 Rg1 and only now 19..Ke7 but then on 20 Bd3 Be6 21 Nc7 Rc8 22 Nxe6 fxe6 White has 23 Rg7+.
This suggests that Black has to prevent Rg7. On 16...Kf8 17 Rg5 h6 18 Rg1 Be6 19 Nc7 Rc8 20 Nxe6+ fxe6 Black has not played ...Ke7 yet and so White cannot play Rg7.
|Nov-20-09|| ||Ulhumbrus: An alternative to 36...Ne8 is 36...Nc4 obstructing White's bishop and attacking the b2 pawn|
|Nov-20-09|| ||aazqua: Is Carlsen really 4 wins 0 losses against Anand in 2009? Hmmm ... which one should have the title?|
|Nov-20-09|| ||Schwartz: Anand.|
|Feb-08-10|| ||HAPERSAUD: anand deserves the title, carlsen like so many other young so called prodigies will fizzle out quite soon.|
|Feb-08-10|| ||micartouse: <anand deserves the title>|
<carlsen like so many other young so called prodigies will fizzle out quite soon.>
He's not a prodigy anymore. He's 19 which is fully adult in the chess world. And he's the #1 rated player, delivering the goods with many elite tournament victories.
|Feb-09-10|| ||Progman: <carlsen like so many other young so called prodigies will fizzle out quite soon.>|
yes, many prodigies fizzle out. However, historically speaking, I suppose all top players in the world - be it Kasparov, Fischer etc.- have been prodigies at some point. They were/are <the prodigies that didn't fizzle out...>
Carlsen could very well become one of the elite few who possesses the necessary staying power.
|Feb-09-10|| ||Aspirador: Anand was not a prodigy btw.|
|Feb-09-10|| ||rogge: <Aspirador: Anand was not a prodigy btw.> Well, he's a former Junior World Champ, isn't he?|
|Feb-09-10|| ||Aspirador: <rogge>: Maybe, I don't know all the details about his career, but he must have been around 20 (end of eighties) when he became GM, then suddenly he was at the top immediately.|
|Feb-10-10|| ||Rachit: He was Eighteen when he became a GM... not to forget that he came from a country very internationl sports experience is close to zero and lacks any infrastructure to recognize prodigies.|
|Feb-11-10|| ||Everett: 44..f6
Is there really nothing better than this? Is 44..Ng5 a possible holding move?
|Feb-11-10|| ||GreenFacedPatzer: Very slow response to <ParisAttack> comment in August:|
<We will have to wait for 32 piece Table Bases! If Moore's Law hold's up I calculate 24-28 years.>
Nope, we will never have 32 piece tablebases. Let's figure out how many positions would be in such a tablebase. We may place 32 pieces on 64 distinct squares. Among the pieces there are 8 indistiguishable pawns for black and white, and indistinguishable pairs of rooks and knights of each color. That yields (64!/ 32! 8! 8! 2! 2! 2! 2!) possible piece-placements. Some large fraction of these positions are illegal (both kings in check) or unreachable (a white pawn beyond the black pawns, with no captures played). So, put another factor of 1000 (a guess) in the denominator to eliminate positions that cannot happen in a game. Even so:
(64!/ 32! 8! 8! 2! 2! 2! 2! 1000) =~
(32)^127 e^(-32)/ 1.6*10^12 (Stirling's approximation) =~
e^380 =~ 10^165 reachable chess positions.
If you compare this number with the roughly 10^80 elementary particles in the known universe, you'll see that even if we had the whole universe at our command, and even if we could represent one chess position in memory by a single elementary particle, we could not construct a computer with sufficient memory to represent all possible chess positions. Not even close.
I don't know if chess will ever be "solved", but if it is, it must be solved by some theorem, not by constructing a complete tablebase.
|Feb-11-10|| ||acirce: Hard to say if there will even be complete 8-piece tablebases 28 years from now. And more than that is extremely hard to imagine.|
|Feb-11-10|| ||Shams: Really dumb question, but do those "n-piece" tablebases include the kings in the counting?|
|Feb-11-10|| ||FamilyTree: 32-piece tablebases...
i would set up 15 bishops vs 15 knights :o)
|Feb-12-10|| ||acirce: <Shams> Yeah.|
|Mar-12-10|| ||notyetagm: Game Collection: Endgame lessons: Rook endings: ROOK ENDGAME SKEW|
Carlsen vs Anand, 2009 59 h6-h7!, 60 Rb6-b8! based on Black e7-king lined up with h7
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 3 OF 4 ·