.I have Houdini 2 Pro , Strelka , Critter, StoackFish,RobboLito,Bouquet,Deep Saros, Deep Rybka and Vitruvius,I think all together i have at least 188 Chess Programs.
...and you are still rated somewhere around 1000. Please consider removing a dozen of them and- who knows, you may reach 1100.
But he'll still be alive once you're dead...
Ultimate win
Unless the battery runs down or electric goes out......
.I have Houdini 2 Pro , Strelka , Critter, StoackFish,RobboLito,Bouquet,Deep Saros, Deep Rybka and Vitruvius,I think all together i have at least 188 Chess Programs.
...and you are still rated somewhere around 1000. Please consider removing a dozen of them and- who knows, you may reach 1100.
But he'll still be alive once you're dead...
Ultimate win
But he'll still die eventually, not a win.
If you are playing against an engine in a correpondence game and not using an engine yourself, you will almost certainly lose. If you are playing against a top engine-using correspondence player and only make the moves your engine recommends, you will also almost certainly lose.
The best correspondence players know how to use their engines as a tool to explore alternative moves, using their own judgment in choosing the most strategically valid lines in complex positions.
I'd like to see you prove this by playing an engine and losing.
Winnie_Pooh wrote:
Yes, I agree.
Even without opening book and endgame tables the latest versions of the top engines (Houdini, Fritz, Rybka, ..) can´t be beaten anymore by an human player.
But always remember, when your computer gets too cocky you can always pull the plug. :) Cheers, John C.
Winnie_Pooh wrote:
Yes, I agree.
Even without opening book and endgame tables the latest versions of the top engines (Houdini, Fritz, Rybka, ..) can´t be beaten anymore by an human player.
But always remember, when your computer gets too cocky you can always pull the plug. :) Cheers, John C.
IM pfren meant engine + humans > engine only. You are an unexplainable example of an extreme retardation caused by brain cell mutation if you think engine > engine + human. Elementary math bro, elementary math..
That is not math. If Anand and Kramnik (ELO ratings 2783 and 2808) play together, they won't magically get a rating of 5591. They'll be somewhat stronger (maybe around 2850? This is just speculation), but we can't simply add their ratings. Anand playing with a 2100 won't make the slightest difference to his rating.
Whether Engine + Human > Engine depends entirely on the relative strengths of the human and the engine. A 2100 human + Houdini = Houdini.
Carlsen + Houdini is probably slightly stronger than Houdini alone. In most correspondance games though, if players around 2400 play with Houdini against Houdini, they'll probably lose if they start using their own moves. Houdini is much, much stronger than everyone else on Earth.
That is not math. If Anand and Kramnik (ELO ratings 2783 and 2808) play together, they won't magically get a rating of 5591. They'll be somewhat stronger (maybe around 2850? This is just speculation), but we can't simply add their ratings. Anand playing with a 2100 won't make the slightest difference to his rating.
Whether Engine + Human > Engine depends entirely on the relative strengths of the human and the engine. A 2100 human + Houdini = Houdini.
Carlsen + Houdini is probably slightly stronger than Houdini alone. In most correspondance games though, if players around 2400 play with Houdini against Houdini, they'll probably lose if they start using their own moves. Houdini is much, much stronger than everyone else on Earth.
What the heck are you saying? And where the heck did you see that I posted rating + rating? I posted Engine + human > engine only, where the heck did you imply your freakin' post??
What the heck are you saying?
Complete, ignorant nonsense. Isn't that apparent?
If this was the case, then every woodpusher with an expensive computer would be a correspondence GM.
What the heck are you saying? And where the heck did you see that I posted rating + rating? I posted Engine + human > engine only, where the heck did you imply your freakin' post??
I said that Engine + Human > Engine only when the skill level of the Engine and human is close. I used the rating examples because ratings are a good measure of skill. If an engine is far, far stronger than a human, then engine + human = engine.
Actually, feygooner, your last comment is not necessarily true. A few years ago there was a human+engine tournament that was won by two people (and their engines of course) rated below FIDE 1800. They managed their technology better than their higher-rated opponents.
Kramnik played a match against what wasn't even the strongest engine back then six years ago, and that with rules that were intended to even things out a bit with regards to opening books and tablebases. Kramnik lost two of the games and drew the remaining four, so it's safe to say that Carlsen wouldn't stand much of a chance against the many hundred Elo points stronger engines of today.
The last game that Kramnik lost was either coincidentally, or all for all.
carlsen will lose against houdini
but GM Vishy Anand can easily beat houdini
That is probably why Magnus has FIDE 2835 and Anand has FIDE 2799
Not True. It's the opposite in Relative.
or closing the positions with engines.... its the best idea to drew with machines.........
Believe me, nowadays that's not possible.
If you go head to head, trying to play for the advantage & the win, you will enter the territory of the Engine; Tactics. Winning cannot be done by closing the position because The engine is programmed to open up and even if you do manage to close the position to your advantage, the engine is programmed to remove that pawn from his territory as soon as possible ( which is done by Tactics ) or otherwise get a Dynamical Advantage elsewhere.
You can still close the position, however ( we are talking about shuffle chess ), but, for a concession move. The usually leads to Draws if Risk is not taken.
Only problem is, Magnus' Rating is going up faster than the chess engines are. Maybe he isn't there today. But in a few years, who knows?
Actually, feygooner, your last comment is not necessarily true. A few years ago there was a human+engine tournament that was won by two people (and their engines of course) rated below FIDE 1800. They managed their technology better than their higher-rated opponents.
How many years ago was this, and how strong were the engines? I'm referring to today's strongest engines.
Computers a few years ago still had a few flaws in them and would get stuck in positions that were playable by humans. I think GM GSerper wrote a couple of articles about this recently here on Chess.com. I can see how an 1700 FIDE would be of help there, but does a 1700 FIDE really have anything to contribute to Houdini?
Computers a few years ago knew just two things: zero, and one.
Today, they still have not learned something more than that.
And that is relevant because?
And that is relevant because?
Because they surely have something to gain from an operator who isn't an absolute woodpusher.
.I have Houdini 2 Pro , Strelka , Critter, StoackFish,RobboLito,Bouquet,Deep Saros, Deep Rybka and Vitruvius,I think all together i have at least 188 Chess Programs.
...and you are still rated somewhere around 1000. Please consider removing a dozen of them and- who knows, you may reach 1100.
But he'll still be alive once you're dead...
Ultimate win