Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Humans v Houdini chess engine (Elo 3300)


  • 5 months ago · Quote · #581

    psuperpepe

    so dont argue for something that is unquestionable " houdini is unbeatable by any human" dont came with idiot examples that only affirm the truth

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #582

    psuperpepe

    IMpfren I challenge you im going to crush you

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #584

    psuperpepe

    I dont want your money only demonstrate that you are wrong

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #586

    fburton

    $50 for a valuable life lesson - sounds like a good deal!

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #588

    SocialPanda

    pfren wrote:
    fburton wrote:

    $50 for a valuable life lesson - sounds like a good deal!

    Well, OK.

    But... I do not want to teach him. I just want a fool's money.

    Up to now, I teach to chess.com for free- and everybody knows that.

    Which is today´s lesson IM pfren? Tongue Out

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #590

    sacking3

    SocialPanda   Which is today´s lesson IM pfren?

    Think for yourself. £50 please

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #591

    SocialPanda

    Thanks for the nice answer Mr. pfren, I haven´t see that Grischuk-Caruana game, I´ll check it! Cool

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #592

    upen2002

    hmmmm...

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #593

    phenix28

    I have a question that wasnt answered after reading through this entire thread. Can't super GMS reliably draw against these engines playing the Berlin or Petrov?

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #594

    Crappov

    phenix28 wrote:

    I have a question that wasnt answered after reading through this entire thread. Can't super GMS reliably draw against these engines playing the Berlin or Petrov?

    Amazing to see how persistent these threads are!  Anyway, here again is what Nakamura recently said about chess programs:

    "Computer programs these days are actually stronger than human players, significantly stronger. If I played a computer in a match I would get destroyed, I would be slaughtered, and that's saying something considering where I'm at in the world of chess."  Hikaru Nakamura - Q&A at Wahington University, St Louis, MO 2/26/11

    I'm not one to argue with Nakamura over this so it seems pretty settled to me.  

    This isn't to say that a GM could never, ever score a point against the beasts, only that the GM's would likely fare poorly in a ten game match.  Remember those odds games some years years ago?

    http://en.chessbase.com/post/the-dzindzi-rybka-3-handicap-match

    The GM's involved didn't fare that well ... and that was with material odds!  Plus it was seven years ago against Rybka 3!

    Are we done here? :)

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #595

    hicetnunc

    phenix28 wrote:

    I have a question that wasnt answered after reading through this entire thread. Can't super GMS reliably draw against these engines playing the Berlin or Petrov?

    That's an interesting question. A match where a draw would count as a win for the human player would probably be of some interest.

  • 5 months ago · Quote · #596

    phenix28

    Crappov wrote:

    phenix28 wrote:

    I have a question that wasnt answered after reading through this entire thread. Can't super GMS reliably draw against these engines playing the Berlin or Petrov?

    Amazing to see how persistent these threads are!  Anyway, here again is what Nakamura recently said about chess programs:

    "Computer programs these days are actually stronger than human players, significantly stronger. If I played a computer in a match I would get destroyed, I would be slaughtered, and that's saying something considering where I'm at in the world of chess."  Hikaru Nakamura - Q&A at Wahington University, St Louis, MO 2/26/11

    I'm not one to argue with Nakamura over this so it seems pretty settled to me.  

    This isn't to say that a GM could never, ever score a point against the beasts, only that the GM's would likely fare poorly in a ten game match.  Remember those odds games some years years ago?

    http://en.chessbase.com/post/the-dzindzi-rybka-3-handicap-match

    The GM's involved didn't fare that well ... and that was with material odds!  Plus it was seven years ago against Rybka 3!

    Are we done here? :)

    Ironically those links actually give me more confidence in my hypothesis that draws can be secured by elite super-GMs playing super solid black defences like the Berlin or Petroff. We can also use the expertise gained by centaur chess to help with preparation so that we can guide how the game plays out 30-40 moves into the game. The only pitfalls would be motivation to play at your very best against a brick wall and avoiding blunders

  • 2 months ago · Quote · #597

    Curiosity8

    Hey.

    Both sides, are ridiculously saying they'd win without any concrete proof. Has all GMs combined, or engines combined whatever - completed chess? Who knows if the theory is correct? Maybe many years later - when they complete chess - many things could be correct, as well as wrong.


    For those rooting humanity - 

    Play against a top notch computer and post your results. You are really just taking one of the engine's weakness and just seeing it in a stupid way really. Does it matter if the engine fails to spot the winning move? Does it really have to win all the games?

    No. And even if they fail to see - it doesn't really matter either. (My personal opinion : You will be simply crushed.)

     

    For those rooting for computers - 

    I'd say the same. (although the results seem obvious to me)

     

    I root the engines. I trust the power of silicon. If the GMs have so much knowledge, so much intuition - why can't they all solve chess? Atleast some part.

    For those rooting humanity:

    Furthermore, why do you rely on computers for analysis if you can do it better and computers "do not give much of reliable analysis"? LOL.

    I'm seriously lolling at Topalov right now... ;)

     

    PS) Nakamura lost to Stockfish 5 even with the aid of Rybka. Could have been a tie, but however - note that the computer wasn't top notch. 


Back to Top

Post your reply: