FREE - In Google Play
FREE - in Win Phone Store
It is well known that correspondence chess world dominated by centaurs (super-computer or cloud computing supported humans). Official cc tournaments played under "computer engine allowed" conditions which means basically you forced to accept play against centaurs. Why?
Some wise man in UK suggests me about its impossibility to detect engine play. This is why officials allowed engine play(they are forced) in tournaments. So, my tough question to the chess.com community: What special chess rule (requires innovative approach) or any kind of innovation that prevents centaurs domination in cc world?
Please only reply if you really have a smart solution. It probably needs above 200 IQ for the innovators. This is why I'm asking you. I have failed to find a solution at least last 10 years .
By the way, I'm not against centaurs vs centaurs competitions. I'm just asking a breathing space for humanity.
I can only agree with you Miriskra. I guess I'm a bit naieve to think everybody on CC plays without using these machines.
Might be time for me to find another hobby.
The group was created for players dedicated to playing chess on this site as close to OTB as possible; It is the word of honor of everyone in the group to play without use of a computer engine. Of course study with an engine is allowed, but play with the help of an engine, book, kabitzer, is not. http://www.chess.com/groups/home/lt-praxis-gt
It's a breathing space for humanity.
I offer this quote from Bobby Fischer: "If I win a tournament, I win it by myself. I do the playing. Nobody helps me. I win the tournament myself, with my own talent." --- New York, 1959
Sounds interesting, some online games do get quite dry because of the database.
What can be done to takeback our pure human-play rights? I'm really looking some intelligent solutions to prevent centaurs vs human unfair competition. Maybe some kind of new rule to chess, or any other smart innovation which makes computers uncapable to invade our cc play. Think human friends!
Don't get me wrong, chess.com is doing great job here to prevent centaurs to invade our pure-play.
Playing OTB is the solution.
Scottrf, this is not the solution. Check out the latest Ivanov fraud. It will grow rapidly no matter how excellent the prevention methods of fraud in OTB play. We really need a solution, I don't know exactly how it is, but I feel somewhere in the out of box contain a solution to stop chess engines invasion. I'm quite sure, the inventor of this solution will become a new hero of the chess world.
CCLA is a United States correspondence chess organization where computer help in play is not allowed.
Correspondence Chess League of America.
Naked chess, in isolation rooms.
Yes David, very proud of CCLA. Have you ever think, how to stop engines invasion to cc? Seriously!
I have thought about it and think it is not possible at the very higher levels.
However if you want to play in CCLA they have players masters and below and I do not think there is much cheating there.
Most players are below master anyway and then CCLA is a good organization for them...
I agree with you that chess should be played without computer assistance. I don't have a solution but it is worth mentioning that computer progress in the game of Go has been really slow. There is something about the rules of Go that makes it difficult to translate into binary logic. However, this may not be directly applicable to our situation as changing the rules of chess is out of the question. It will no longer be chess as we know it if the rules are changed.
Both CCLA and USCF's top CC rankings are plagued with cheaters. I've played members and reviewed games from both and they were quite obviously centauring it up. Even Alex Dunne realized damn near everybody was cheating based on how badly he got crushed in the last Absolute Championship he played in, and therefore lifted the ban on computer use for the 2013 tournament.
ICCF doesn't worry about it because it's near impossible to catch every cheater and actually prove they were cheating. That's why I like playing on ICCF. I don't have to worry about cheating in terms of moves on the board, and I like out-preparing my opponent in spite of his/her monster machines.
I did not know CCLA was full of cheaters. [at highest levels]
I am not surprised the Absolute Championship had cheaters and then the rule was changed.
By the way there is nothing wrong with playing in ICCF it is just that
some do not like the computer aspect. [which cannot be helped anyway]
There is one thing I really like about allowing computers in ICCF-it means I have records which will never be broken...[a little selfish, I know...]
Agreed, it is honor that prevents centaur domination in CC for the honorable individuals. I cannot speak for the masses. It reminds me of a quote: "In honor there is hope." I do not recall the original source.
There is something about the rules of Go that makes it difficult to translate into binary logic.
This is interesting. It may give some hints to heroic innovator. Come on! This is not a usual thread that discuss bad or good ICCF or CCLA policies. This is a thread that seeks a hope (a little bit hope) about pure-human play on cc competitions. We just need an idea first.
How can humanity make a new chess that is untouchable by computers? Please think about it and share with honesty!
True true. Go is untouchable by computers. Supercomputers for chess can see 40 moves into the future in a relatively small amount of time. It took the world's best supercomputer 38 hours to see 8 moves into the game in Go, operating at an amazing 1.02 petaflops. The best computers in the world can only win a fraction of games angainst the "GMs" of Go at a 9 STONE handicap, which is quite a lot.
Perhaps a different version of chess will allow for less computer advantage. Adding more squares, more pieces, different rules will lessen the impact of the computer.
This to many would totally ruin the game of chess. But, seeing as how it is about to be solved in about 80-90 years, computers will become unbeatable and something would have to be done.
Tjornan, thank you for your valuable information. Now we're making improvement about the search of pure-human play. You give us some perspective about adding additional pieces and squares to make chess game harder for computer. Frankly, I don't think it will prevent the total invasion. It just increase the completion time of the invasion. So, we need another approach. This possible invention shouldn't about the computing power or speed. I really can't explain it, mostly about my ignorance on AI and chess engines.
Being a weak player helps! For example I am a class B player. So when I play against somebody of same level or even up to ELO 2000 I can be quite sure they are not cheaters - otherwise their rating would be much higher.
uri65, we are not talking about cheating here. But you're right about your analysis.