|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1687 OF 1784 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jul-13-08 | | sentriclecub: After he gets banned, at least we'll have one less 0-1 voter. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | Boerboel Guy: <Artar1: Can someone please explain to me what this argument is all about?>
A handful of people might care, but no-one else does. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | capatal: My how the fool can hang upon the word. -
Shakespeare |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | zanshin: <MostlyAverageJoe: < f54280: Generally, those are the evals of the *positions* reached by those moves, which are often the eval of the terminal *position* reached by what the engine considers best play from those positions.> You've just rephrased the gist of what I posted. > <MAJ> I agree with you 100%. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | twinlark: This page is no longer very interesting chessically, as we're so won it's unfunny (+7 on my abacus), but it's provided an opportunity for some absorbing discussion that would never otherwise occur. One idle question that comes up is: how many human hours this game has consumed? And kilowatts of energy from lighting, heating/air conditioning and computers? GMT will resign in due course and in the meantime we can talk about our next game and enjoy the ambience of an inevitable win against a top player. Hopefully the discussion in <chancho>'s forum will save some arguments about what our first move should be in the next game. Personally I'm not fussed one way or the other, as any defence we adopt will provide the opportunity for discussions, dissertations, and arguments that will no doubt generate enough heat to warm a medium sized country and maybe even enough light to see by. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | Karpova: The list:
57.Re4
Tabanus; MostlyAverageJoe; stukkenjager; rinus; whiteshark; GoldenKnight; hms123; hoodrobin; kb2ct; Boerboel Guy; ajile; g.mueller; moronovich; JustWoodshifting; chesstoplay; Artar1; capatal; YouRang; Waitaka; DPLeo; chancho; RookFile; kwgurge; firebrandx; truefriends; weisyschwarz; patzer2; DanLanglois; scolley; Nightranger; kwid; Nite4k; Ron; Madman99X; jovack; talisman; zsoydd; stonebrain2006; Dmaster995; zooter; vikinx; falso contacto; ravel5184; Draw
Dmaster995;
User: The List |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | sentriclecub: <A handful of people might care, but no-one else does.> It started off excellent. I'm sorry if the debate took away some of your enjoyment from the game. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | twinlark: Some people should just learn to be a bit more laid back and let the discussions and debates roll along; what else are we going to do here? |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | capatal: http://www.chessgames.com/perl/ches... We might discuss some of Arno Nickel's losses with white? |
|
Jul-13-08
 | | rinus: Just some thinking:
Arno Nickel's losses with white -- can White(AN) improve his play? Arno Nickel's wins with white -- can Black(we) improve his(our) play? |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | classF: Don't discuss GM Nickel here. He is actually a registered World Team member. We should discuss on another page. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | kwid: Jul-13-08
<<sentriclecub: DanL>>
It seems we are trying to reinvent the wheel again! Or are we trying to design a super engine for us? I think that this subject should be at a forum under a heading like:“ Engine Programming and Technical Discussions”
[Describing a high-performance parallel tree search algorithm that uses Dynamic Tree Splitting (DTS) to search alpha/beta minimax game trees, specifically those for the game of chess. This algorithm divides the search tree among several processors on a shared memory parallel machine. This paper discusses the following topics: (1) the DTS algorithm, (2) how the tree is divided into parallel pieces that can be searched in parallel; (3) performance results of the algorithm and (4) analysis of the results to see where further improvements might occur..] [ Making separate tables is a bad idea: the same position might be present multiple times (for different searched depth), wasting memory space. In general, the largest searched depth would be the most accurate, and there is no need to store the others. If the search would only probe the table for its current depth it would use a less accurate result, while a more accurate one was available. Or it would not find a result, where even the move of a less accurate result would have been a helpful hint. And probing all tables to find the best result might be very expensive.] [Because of such a kind of problems I give the stored best move a very high importance. Its reuse is 100% neutral to search depths, maybe its performance in contrast. But using bound values crossing search level differences is making me a lot of headaches. E.g. this destroys the ability to get a unique node evaluation, because it will depend on move sort or parallel tasks.] |
|
Jul-13-08
 | | Chessgames Challenge:
57.Re4
FINAL VOTE RESULTS:
| 57.Re4 |
|
342 | votes |
(95.3%) |
| 57.0-1 |
|
12 | votes |
(3.3%) |
| 57.Kd2 |
|
3 | votes |
(0.8%) |
|
total # of votes: 359
draw requests: 12 (3.3%)
click for larger view
|
|
| Jul-13-08 | | Red October: when 0-1 is the second most votes (12!) it ceases to be funny |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | hoodrobin: <Red October: when 0-1 is the second most votes (12!) it ceases to be funny> Although it is 3.3% facing 95.3% ! |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | ajile: <twinlark: Some people should just learn to be a bit more laid back and let the discussions and debates roll along; what else are we going to do here?> Agreed. We have the game won and are simply waiting for him to resign. Presumably he wants to take the game to the point where it's an obvious win for White so people in the future can see the whole game and it's conclusion. I understand his point of view and he has the right to force us to show the win but I'm seriously ready for the next game to start. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | kb2ct: Now we wait.
I suppose the chess engine programmers will use multiple processors in a manner that to some degree simulates team play. At least they should. :0) |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | Red October: and it should assign a forum for each main move choice |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | kwid: Just for the record - Mate on square e5
1. d4 f5 2. g3 Nf6 3. Bg2 g6 4. c4 Bg7 5. Nc3 O-O 6. Nf3 d6 7. O-O c6 8. Qb3
Na6 9. Rd1 Kh8 10. Qa3 Nc7 11. d5 Bd7 12. Rb1 a5 13. dxc6 bxc6 14. c5 Ne4 15.
cxd6 exd6 16. Bf4 d5 17. Be5 Re8 18. Bxg7+ Kxg7 19. Rbc1 Qe7 20. Qxe7+ Rxe7 21.
Na4 Nb5 22. Nb6 Ra6 23. Nxd7 Rxd7 24. Ne5 Rd6 25. f3 Nf6 26. a4 Nc7 27. Bf1 Re6
28. f4 Ne4 29. e3 Rb6 30. Bd3 Na6 31. b4 Nxb4 32. Bxe4 fxe4 33. Nd7 Rb7 34. Nc5
Ree7 35. Nxb7 Rxb7 36. g4 Rc7 37. Rc5 Ra7 38. h4 Ra6 39. Rcc1 Kf6 40. Rf1 Nd3
41. Rb1 h5 42. gxh5 gxh5 43. Rb8 c5 44. Rfb1 d4 45. Kf1 $1 dxe3 46. Rf8+ Ke7
47. Rbb8 Rg6 48. Rbe8+ Kd6 49. Rxe4 Kd5 50. f5 Rg3 51. Rfe8 c4 52. f6 Rf3+ 53.
Ke2 Rxf6 54. Kxe3 Rc6 55. Rd4+ Kc5 56. Rb8 Re6+ 57. Re4 Rxe4+ 58. Kxe4 Nb4 59.
Rb5+ Kd6 60. Kd4 Nc6+ 61. Kxc4 Ne5+ 62. Kc3 Nf3 63. Rxh5 Kc6 64. Kc4 Kd6 65.
Rd5+ Ke6 66. h5 Kf6 67. Rxa5 Kg7 68. Rb5 Kf6 69. a5 Ng5 70. a6 Ne4 71. Kd4 Nd6
72. Rb6 Ke7 73. a7 Nc8 74. Rb7+ Kf6 75. a8=Q Nd6 76. Qa6 Ke6 77. h6 Kf5 78.
Qxd6 Kg4 79. h7 Kf3 80. Rb2 Kg4 81. h8=Q Kg5 82. Ke3 Kg4 83. Qdh6 Kf5 84. Qg8 Ke5 85. Qf4# Have fun. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | Red October: or he is playing this in the spirit of an exhibition game which it is and is giving the benefit of the less heralded player to play out and savour the win (which is also in time honoured tradition) |
|
Jul-13-08
 | | chancho: Either Timmerman knows something that we dont, or he's oblivious to the fact that he's dead lost in this game. I mean why hasn't he thrown the towel already... |
|
Jul-13-08
| | chancho: Sorry about that Deffi. |
|
Jul-13-08
 | | OhioChessFan: I don't read minds for a living, so I could be wrong, but I am not buying the suggestion that the game is being played out until it's an obvious win for the OTB club level player. If that was the case, every move would be made on the first day, ala playing quickly in a lost position OTB and not using up all remaining time. No matter. Game on. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | ganstaman: <chesscard: You should move on and start a new game, and send him some analysis and (politely) ask for a resignation.> How many more times must we tell you that we can't and won't do this before you stop suggesting it? Because I'm willing to try: We can't and won't do this. We can't and won't do this. We can't and won't do this. We can't and won't do this. |
|
| Jul-13-08 | | ganstaman: <DanLanglois: your response about having a Ph.D is priceless, because I'm still the one who is right.> There are sometimes signs in an argument that should hint to the saner side that the argument is no longer worth pursuing. Among these signs is a declaration of absolute correctness, even if in direct contrast to an expert in the field (a PhD and 25 years of work does make one an expert). There is nothing left that can be convincing, so the argument is destined to be stalemated. Proceed at your own risk. |
|
|
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 1687 OF 1784 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
