There is an open forum here:
Submitted by IM ShahzadMirzahttp://cssjs.chesscomfiles.com/images/icons/member/diamond.png
This is my personal evaluation of the RAW Chess Challange 2010:
Let us see the game first:
http://www.chess.com/article/view/raw-chess-challenge-2010-what-went-wrong-for-the-world
I say Carlsen, 44 moves, QID, Naka
I would be interested to know the following statistics for the match:
1) Total number of unique viewers
2) Maximum number of viewers at any one time
3) Maximum and Minimum number of voters
Also I would like to know where this event was advertised.
Chess promotion must become more creative. This match is a great start.
One suggestion would be that only the people who have showed up at the start have the right to vote.
Perhaps in future games of this caliber the vote cast out by members should be weighted out based on their rating.
In this situation Carlsen or anybody would be crushed easily with votes coming from Rybka, Stockfish, Fritz etc.
Perhaps in future games of this caliber the vote cast out by members should be weighted out based on their rating.
In this situation Carlsen or anybody would be crushed easily with votes coming from Rybka, Stockfish, Fritz etc.
What's Deep Rybka 4 (64-bit on quad-core) rating now? 3120-something? 
If that'll the case, Magnus should just sit back and watch the engines duke it out.
Perhaps in future games of this caliber the vote cast out by members should be weighted out based on their rating.
In this situation Carlsen or anybody would be crushed easily with votes coming from Rybka, Stockfish, Fritz etc.
What's Deep Rybka 4 (64-bit on quad-core) rating now? 3120-something?
If that'll the case, Magnus should just sit back and watch the engines duke it out.
Here are some elo ratings of the currently available chess engines:
Deep Rybka 4 64-bit = 3309 elo
Rybka 3 64-bit = 3253 elo
Stockfish 1.7.1 64-bit = 3206 elo
Deep Fritz 12 = 3111 elo
Fritz 12 = (no data but definitely lower than Deep Fritz 12)
3309?! I haven't even heard of tournament results among humans reaching that high! 
Engine ratings aren't 1:1 with human ratings... they get a bit inflated among themselves... not that computers aren't stronger, but their strength is in the consistency of their moves, not absolute strength of each individual move... something that throws a lot of amateurs off when trying to analyse with an engine I would guess.
Engine ratings aren't 1:1 with human ratings... they get a bit inflated among themselves...
If we were to normalize the chess engine ratings, what would they be at? Let's start with the 3309 elo of Deep Rybka 4 (x64, quad-core). I'm guessing 2900 more or less?
Perhaps in future games of this caliber the vote cast out by members should be weighted out based on their rating.
This wouldn't work as you didn't even need to be chess.com member to play. (and osrry if it was answered I don't read much of the thread, just what catches my eye :-))
Very interesting comment, and who wher the voters? do you know?
No, how can I know?
I was pointed out to this site, for a little more details about the game, included pictures.
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6666
Have fun 
Engine ratings aren't 1:1 with human ratings... they get a bit inflated among themselves...
If we were to normalize the chess engine ratings, what would they be at? Let's start with the 3309 elo of Deep Rybka 4 (x64, quad-core). I'm guessing 2900 more or less?
I think it was Rybka 3 (or was it that 2.1.2 thing) that was scoring well against GMs with pawn and move odds. Rybka 4 is a bit stronger, plus they weren't playing the x64 quad-core style which adds some more. Over 3000 isn't a bad guess IMO, maybe even as much as 3200... I never stopped to try and estimate it, I guess they aren't too far off... anything over 3000 is monstrous anyway.
How about Subduction? I'm watching a documentary on subduction volcanoes on the tube right now. Whatever, don't blame me for the loss. I missed the game. What time was it? Central daylight time.
Engine ratings aren't 1:1 with human ratings... they get a bit inflated among themselves...
If we were to normalize the chess engine ratings, what would they be at? Let's start with the 3309 elo of Deep Rybka 4 (x64, quad-core). I'm guessing 2900 more or less?
Over 3000 isn't a bad guess IMO, maybe even as much as 3200... anything over 3000 is monstrous anyway.
With that, we both agree that the chess engines are too much for even the super elites to win against.
Yet people still believe that Magnus should play against possible chess engine users to "prove himself" in a "true test."
Are there time controls where a GM would beat Rybka?
Surely in a 1 minute game, the GM would dominate. Where's the line?
Generally programs do better (relatively to humans) on fast time controls.
If you look at chess.com computers in Live Chess, they all have the highest ratings on Bullet and the lowest on Standard.
Oh, I didn't expect that.
Perhaps in future games of this caliber the vote cast out by members should be weighted out based on their rating.
This wouldn't work as you didn't even need to be chess.com member to play. (and osrry if it was answered I don't read much of the thread, just what catches my eye :-))