< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2092 OF 2092 ·
|Aug-22-15|| ||keypusher: <The computer's advantage over a human is that it can calculate millions of positions per second. And since humans can't imitate this process, we can learn nothing from computers. You say the results are often the same, so what does it matter? The processes of play, for the purposes of learning, are more valuable than the result.>|
It's easy and obvious how to use a computer to learn. Look at a given position, try to figure out what to do and what the threats are. Then show it to a computer and play through the lines the computer generates. You will see resources you didn't know were there.
Another way to use it is to have an engine running as you play through a GM-annotated game. The computer will allow you to examine lines the human GM didn't bother to discuss (because they were obvious to him, or because he overlooked something).
Finally, of course, you can just play against the computer. It's frustrating to lose all the time, but it's nice to have an opponent that never gets tired and is always up for a game.
|Aug-22-15|| ||Jim Bartle: <It's getting to the point where truth and attention to detail is an after thought in chess movies, that'll I'll be pleasantly surprised if they just set up the board correctly with the white square on the right!;-)>|
On the other hand, "Pawn Sacrifice" does show Fischer sitting at a desk writing "My 61 Memorable Games." So we know it's accurate in at least one sense.
|Aug-22-15|| ||AylerKupp: <<latvalatvian> No one would look at the computer page. I certainly wouldn't because it's full of chess computers and as you know, I don't like them.>|
Well, hard as it might be for you to believe, your opinion is not share by everyone. Some people like chess computers and they actually look at computer pages. I certainly do but I do not delude myself to think that others don't. The thing is to remember that computers are just tools that can be helpful on occasion if you use them wisely.
<Besides, even the Bushman in Australia know about Fischer>
How many bushmen in Australia did you interview in order to make such a statement? How did you select the sample of bushmen to interview and what was the percentage that knew about Fischer? If you are going to use the world "bushman" to apparently disparage a group of people by implying that they are ignorant of many things in this world, then you should be prepared to back up your statements.
<Chess was invented for humans alone>
You are correct there. Al Gore told me that was his goal when he invented chess.
Look, you have what I think is an irrational fear of computers. I get it, it's very common on this site. And it is also clear that you have a closed mind on the matter. I have suggested several ways in which you can perhaps open up your mind and learn something so that you can discuss the topic out of knowledge rather than ignorance but it is clear that you are not interested in doing so. Fine, your choice. And you will be the lesser person as a result.
So as a result I am leaving this topic forever. Which by your example should be about a week.
|Aug-22-15|| ||HeMateMe: I always play through some of the games posted on this site, when there is a world championship of computer chess. Their game is played at a higher level than what humans can accomplish, how could one not be interested?|
|Aug-22-15|| ||diceman: <latvalatvian: A person who only cares about the results can't really care much about chess which is much more than that. It's like only caring about how a novel ends.>|
You may want to change the name of your "I Hate Computers" club to:
"I Hate Other Chess players who use Computers" club.
(poor Magnus, Anand, et al)
...because if your problem is hating computers, then don't use one.
|Aug-22-15|| ||diceman: <latvalatvian: A person finds an elegant combination. Down the street a person puts the position on a computer and the computer finds the same elegant combination. Which experience is more valuable? Well, it's the same result but I'm sure most would side with a person making an effort. Chess is about figuring things out and the valuable part of the game is the process in which this is achieved.>|
That's why you should never study the games of great players, opening books, middlegame books, endgame books.
...it doesn't matter if they know it, you have to figure it out!
|Aug-22-15|| ||diceman: <latvalatvian:
How can anything that thinks so many positions per second imitate human thought?>
...computers are designed to play as perfect a games of chess as they can.
...by definition, that will tend to agree with the play of the strongest human players.
<But I never found a level that was even close to being human-like.>
How did you not slaughter it, since you are one of the ones who figures things out, and doesn't take the "easy" computer route?
<I never found a level that was even close to being human-like>
...I think what you mean is
|Aug-22-15|| ||Joshka: <keypusher> well if rugby fans are delighted in their choice, fine, but as regards to Bobby's story, for them to NOT at least find a tall lean 6ft 1 to maybe 3 inch actor show's me their lack of sincerity and justice to Bobby's story.|
Of course I'll watch it and even buy it when and if it comes to DVD, which is all they care about anyway. But I'm a stickler for getting certain things as close as possible, and especially when it's not all that difficult to do!! Also if your budget prevents you from achieving the desired results, just stop and allow someone else to do ir the right way.
|Aug-22-15|| ||nok: I agree Nicolas Cage would have been better. Toby's too much of a model pupil.|
|Aug-22-15|| ||Khapablanca: I think a face is more important than the height, and Maguire fits in right. He also have that "odd" thing on him. Cameras "games" can make him look a little bit taller anyway, putting shorter actor next to him also, etc. But Maguire has the resemblance, the "odd" thing and maybe that is what mattered at the time the producers made their choice for an actor to represent Bobby Fischer. If there is something they should change, is the movie title. I still dont like that one, Fischer was not a pawn in any sense, neither his games are based solely in sacrifices, combinations, etc.|
|Aug-22-15|| ||Joshka: Well I believe the physical height, aura of a person determines the resemblance. Bobby had the physique of an athlete, tall broad shouldered...having Toby, makes him appear 'geeky' at least to me. Bobby was anything but geeky!. I posted the actor that was appearing here in a stage production a year or so ago........he had the right look as far as I'm concerned. Oh well, if the movie generates interest in chess, that's all the better I guess.|
|Aug-22-15|| ||Eggman: <<I think a face is more important than the height>>|
Part of Fischer's appeal is that he was a World Chess Champion who belied the nerd stereotype, in part because he was a physically imposing 6'2". The diminutive Maguire doesn't capture this aspect of Fischer's charisma. The trailer *does* look pretty good, though. It could still be a good movie on the whole.
|Aug-22-15|| ||TheFocus: <Jim Bartle> <It's getting to the point where truth and attention to detail is an after thought in chess movies, that'll I'll be pleasantly surprised if they just set up the board correctly with the white square on the right!;-)>|
<<On the other hand, "Pawn Sacrifice" does show Fischer sitting at a desk writing "My 61 Memorable Games." So we know it's accurate in at least one sense.>>
In the film, you can see Ed Trice standing behind him looking on.
"Hey, Bobby. Call Garry 'Weinstein'. He hates that."
|Aug-22-15|| ||HeMateMe: Nick Cage has only two emotive displays: annoyed and seriously annoyed. How he had a career in the movies is beyond me. He makes Travolta look like Sir Lawrence Olivier.|
|Aug-22-15|| ||TheFocus: Although I griped about the script of <Pawn Sacrifice>, I wasn't about to turn down the role I was offered.|
In one scene with Tobey/Bobby, I ask him his opinion of the Florida Fischer.
"Tell him his videos suck. And to lose the jizz bib."
|Aug-22-15|| ||diceman: <Khapablanca:
If there is something they should change, is the movie title. I still dont like that one, Fischer was not a pawn in any sense, neither his games are based solely in sacrifices, combinations, etc.>
|Aug-22-15|| ||diceman: <Sneaky: I just saw the Pawn Sacrifice trailer https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xFH|
...LOL, looks great.
"I'm coming for you! I'm coming for yooooooou!">
There was some artistic license in that scene.
In real life when Bobby shouted:
<"I'm coming for you! I'm coming for yooooooou!">
he was wearing two pearl handled revolvers.
|Aug-22-15|| ||Joshka: <eggman> <who belied the nerd stereotype> Well there ya go, thank you! AMEN. <the diminutive Maguire doesn't capture> Very well said, thanks:-)|
|Aug-22-15|| ||TheFocus: I see none of you has begun writing the ultimate Fischer film.|
You would think that chess players could do that.
But then again, not all chess players can be good writers. And not all writers can be good chess players.
Some tall actors don't have the talent to do the role of Fischer.
Someone like Tobey though has the chops to do the role, but he is not a tall man.
But from the trailer, I think he probably did a very good job.
Tom Cruise did a great Jack Reacher, even though the Reacher in Lee Child's (fantastic gentleman by the way) books, was 6 feet and a few inches tall.
|Aug-23-15|| ||Khapablanca: Nicolas Cage could be a good 1992 Fischer, and the 1992 match could be a good beginning for the movie instead of a boring chronologically story.|
|Aug-23-15|| ||MissScarlett: <Nicolas Cage could be a good 1992 Fischer>|
Well, he's got the hair, for a start.
|Aug-23-15|| ||HeMateMe: screen test for the Fischer movie, the difficulties of being Bob after '72:|
|Aug-23-15|| ||diceman: <Eggman:
The diminutive Maguire doesn't capture this aspect of Fischer's charisma.>
Who knew Fischer out physiqued Spiderman?
Kind of funny from Tobey's point of view.
He plays a superhero in the movies,
and folks are like:
...get outta here you little shrimp,
you cant play a chess grandmaster!
Spiderman ain't built for chess!
|Aug-24-15|| ||Eggman: <<diceman>> I would say that Maguire was miscast as Spiderman, too. The difference is that I don't *care* about Spiderman.|
|Aug-24-15|| ||diceman: <Eggman: <<diceman>> I would say that Maguire was miscast as Spiderman, too. The difference is that I don't *care* about Spiderman.>|
"Superhero" made me think maybe a pre-injury Christopher Reeve(Superman)
could have played Fischer. His height
is listed at 6'4". Obviously, he'd need appropriate hair dye and a "Fischer cut."
It would have also allowed for the subplot, Fischer grabbed the poisoned pawn in game one, because Spassky wore a kryptonite tie clip.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2092 OF 2092 ·