< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 20 OF 20 ·
|Jun-23-19|| ||harrylime: Give Robert Fischer a STOCKFISH .. a Robert Fischer circa 1967 ... and HE WOULD LITERALLY BLOW YOU AWAY.|
|Jun-23-19|| ||perfidious: Regrettably, the possibility cannot be excluded; we have seen instances of computer assistance going back to 1993, the Stone Age, if not earlier, involving even some very strong players--stronger than your humble correspondent ever was.|
Details of the 1993 contretemps may be found here: Von Neumann. I was present for part of the event but only heard of it on my next visit to Philadelphia, some weeks later.
|Jun-24-19|| ||keypusher: < James51358: Beatgiant, perfidious, so today's GM's would use computers to analyze adjourned positions? That's sad indeed. Have we lost the ability to think for ourselves?>|
Of course not. But since the computers are now stronger than human grandmasters, present and past, rules of competition have to be changed to deal with that ineluctable fact.
|Jun-24-19|| ||perfidious: The truly unfortunate part is that some players, in chess and worse still, in life, cannot or will not think for themselves. As <keypusher> notes, no getting away from it.|
|Jun-26-19|| ||beatgiant: <James51358>
<Beatgiant, perfidious, so today's GM's would use computers to analyze adjourned positions?>
How could we implement a rule against using computers for adjournment analysis? During the rest period, would we place the players in some kind of isolation ward under constant surveillance until the game resumption?
And without an effective rule against it, any player would be crazy not to use computers. It would be conceding a huge advantage to the other player.
|Jun-27-19|| ||James51358: beatgiant, it's not about rule and regulations. This simple man believes in our own ability to think for ourselves. We humans don't need a computer's aide. I, personally, am just an average player. I choose to play to my own abilities, with no outside help. The real excitement in this game is our abilities to think for ourselves. We don't need computer assistance. your thoughts!|
|Jun-27-19|| ||beatgiant: <James51358>
It's easy for us as amateurs to forswear computers, but the cold, hard fact is that computers are a game-changer for professional play. No top player today can afford to do without them.
|Jul-01-19|| ||James51358: beatgiant, that is plain sad. I play on chess.com. Win or lose, I love this brain game. My record 147 wins, 185 losses, and 10 draws. I've never nor will I ever use a computer to assist me in any of my games. Again, its saddens me that the pros need to do so.|
|Jul-01-19|| ||James51358: Anyways, back to this great game between 2 awesome players that didn't have nor needed a computer. Will someone, please, explain how 69 Rd1+ and 69 Rc3+ are really any different. Doesn't Fischer win either way?|
|Jul-01-19|| ||beatgiant: <James51358>
On 69. Rc3+, if Black tries to advance the king with 69...Ke2, White can liquidate the pawns with 70. Rxc4 f3 71. Re4+ Kf1 72. Ra4 f2 73. Bc5. How do you think Fischer could win?
|Jul-31-19|| ||James51358: 69. Rd1+. i wonder how many such blunders that I've made in my own games? lol. And, what about other world champions? The blunders they made.|
|Jul-31-19|| ||harrylime: Boris is God.
Bobby is more than a God.
Discuss. ( WITHOUT STOCK FISH pleeeeze )
|Aug-01-19|| ||James51358: Could Spassky's 14 Bxa4 be a mistake? Due to being down on material and losing his white squared bishop that was aiming at Fischer's king? I offer that 14 Bc4 may be a better choice. your thoughts?|
|Aug-01-19|| ||utssb: 14.Bc4 shouldn't work because of
14...Ne4 15.Qe4 Nc5 16.Qd5 Ne6 with ...c6 and b5 coming ex. 17.Ra5 c6 18.Ra8 cd5 19.Bd5 Nc7
14...Ne4 15.Qe4 Nc5 16.Qe3 Ne6 safe with the pawn up for Black
14...Ne4 15.Bb5 Bd7 16.Ba4 Ba4 17.Qe4 Bc6 pawn, bishop pair and tempo for Black
16.Qe4 Bb5 17.Qb7 c6 (or anything really)
14...Ne4 15.Bb5 Bd7 16.Bd7 Qd7 17.Qe4 Nc5 or b5
|Aug-01-19|| ||utssb: or 14...Ne4 15.Bb5 Nac3 rather|
|Aug-03-19|| ||James51358: This awesome game between 2 great players is so much fun to analyze!!! It's like, how did this game happen? No computers, just 2 intelligence human brains at work!! INCREDIBLE!!! This game took over 9 Hours to play.Not to mention the over night analyzing!! WOW!!!|
|Sep-08-19|| ||N.O.F. NAJDORF: 'I found ways that Spassky could get a winning position in the opening of the Alekhine Defence. Fischer played the Alekhine Defence and Spassky missed a very big advantage.'|
|Sep-13-19|| ||James51358: N.O.F.. I'm sure post game analyze prove that both players missed some good moves. I believe 1....Nf6 hit Spassky like a cold shower. He was not prepared for it at all and lost this beautiful, yet brutal, game to Fischer. Giving Fischer a strong 3 point lead with just 11 games left. Any thoughts?|
|Oct-23-19|| ||The Boomerang: harrylime: <perfidious: That formidable analytical team which assisted Botvinnik in his efforts to hold the draw against Fischer would have had nothing on today's Stockfish et al.>
Give Fischer Stockfish . The Fischer of 1970. Just like Magnus the draw King has ..
That would be interesting. 😎😚"
Carlsen scored better against Anand in 2013, than Fischer did against Spassky in 1972.
With regards to engines it's all relative, if Fischer had an engine his opponents would too, actually for the first time his opponents would have a reference point stronger than Fischer, so that should narrow the gap between Fischer and his opponents, would it not?
|Oct-23-19|| ||Carrots and Pizza: Is this not one of the most hard fought, uncompromising WCC games of all time? I guess there are some mistakes in this game and some people think that takes away from its glory, but I don't care. This is real chess!|
|Oct-23-19|| ||ewan14: Fischer playing the Alekhine Defence should not have been a surprise|
|Nov-08-19|| ||James51358: This game took over 9 hours(over 2 days) to play. Not to mention many hours of overnight analysis after adjournment. We can't even imagine that in today's speed chess world. Kinda sad!!|
|Nov-08-19|| ||RookFile: It's a pity that neither Spassky nor Fischer wrote a book about this match. There must be a lot of unrevealed secrets.|
|Nov-08-19|| ||Ron: < RookFile: It's a pity that neither Spassky nor Fischer wrote a book about this match. There must be a lot of unrevealed secrets.>|
Spassky is still alive, so there's still a chance.
Spassky might not be inclined to write a book though. Perhaps he can get a co-author.
|Nov-14-19|| ||James51358: Rookfile, this very game has it's unrevealed secrets. 2 great players in this one incredible game. Fought tooth and nail til the end. how amazing!!!!|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 20 OF 20 ·