cNA magnus carlsen really beat STRONGEST ENGINE IN THE WORLD LIKE HOUIDIDNI 2PRO? please enlighten me
The time of humans is over - the time of the engines has come
yes....the machine era has begun...
be afraid...be very afraid!
He isn't even guaranteed to beat strong grandmasters every time, in fact his recent tournament results aren't all that great so he has no chance against Houdini running on multiple cores. Its actually irrelevant because Houdini 'cheats' by having perfect access to the most up to date opening theory and endgame tablebases while playing, most of us could play better if we were looking things up as we went along.
if you think the opening book isn't a big deal try playing against an engine with the opening book turned off, they play 500 ELO worse.
You may have a point in that. But even if an engine with 3200 ELO is down 500 ELO without opening book it is still a formidable opponent
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.
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.
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.
Of course they can - just press the on/off switch button...
Someone told me in the general forum when I asked whether humans could beat the best of the best computers...that in long games...3hr / 5hr...humans could still win...
I'm not sure whether that person meant that the computer could use opening books or whatever...
So...again...computers are just too good these days?
Computers are good calculators, that's all. They are NOT chessplayers. By definition, a chessplayer is human.
It would be extremely boring to watch a perfect robot play perfect golf, and not miss one shot, EVER. Who needs to see that?
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
there are some game which anand played some moves which even houdini 3 GB hash and full strength wont pick up but when u play that move it quickly changes it evaluvation to wining
Botvinnik (AVRO 1938) game where Bot plays the famous 30. Ba3! And what does Houdini make of Karjakin vs Anand (2006) where Anand played 24...Nc7!! ?
Also, I think the reason why KNps starts off slower and gradually increases is because the program is performing more evaluation functions in the early part of its analysis, and less evaluation functions as it gets deeper into the position. That's the only thing i can think of that makes sense
So in long games do computers routinely beat humans now?
Or can humans still win?
Yes, computers are too good. Whoever told you humans are better in 3-5 hours games either didn't know what they were talking about or were time travelers from 15 years in the past.
Maybe he can draw one game out of very many, but not win...
Ok...so now I'll believe you guys and not the people from the other thread...there's no truth on the internet!
I think you're right though
Computers have an unfair advantage...they don't get tired, they have no feelings about this or that position, plus they have a huge opening book they can consult. They don't fall in love, they don't have sick relatives, etc....
Carlsen has said in an interview that he does not play computers, because it is like playing an idiot who can beat you every time!
And how right he is... There is no better way to destroy any chess self esteem you may have left than by playing against this idiot...