@12627
If you studied mathematics at Cambridge, then did you know Prof. Alan Baker?
I have a book of his on my shelf.
I remember him and that he was a number theorist, and could picture him. I recall that he had won a Fields Medal.
All credit to you for having a book on number theory, but it doesn't fix your mistakes.
Will you win a game against Carlsen? Certainly not. more precisely: 0.0000541%
People with advanced mathematical qualifications understand that 0.000000541 does not equal zero.
They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw.
They understand that you need random events to be independent in order to multiply probabilities.
For some reason, you aren't even capable of learning that when told.
yeah ive started to notice that tygxc just assumes independence for all of his 'calculations', and then tries to justify independence after the fact. Drawing probability from ELO is especially inaccurate, as anyone who's worked with ELO systems knows that they are fundamentally flawed in calculating probability. heck, even a regular subscriber to hikaru can figure that out from why he tries to grind blitz ratings from against only a certain elo range.
@12627
If you studied mathematics at Cambridge, then did you know Prof. Alan Baker?
I have a book of his on my shelf.
Try getting your shelf to write the posts. It may be more capable of learning.
Will you win a game against Carlsen? Certainly not. more precisely: 0.0000541%
People with advanced mathematical qualifications understand that 0.000000541 does not equal zero.
They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw.
They understand that you need random events to be independent in order to multiply probabilities.
For some reason, you aren't even capable of learning that when told.
yeah ive started to notice that tygxc just assumes independence for all of his 'calculations', and then tries to justify independence after the fact. Drawing probability from ELO is especially inaccurate, as anyone who's worked with ELO systems knows that they are fundamentally flawed in calculating probability. heck, even a regular subscriber to hikaru can figure that out from why he tries to grind blitz ratings from against only a certain elo range.
While I would expect probabilities predicted by the Elo system to be less accurate for large rating differences (a scientifically testable hypothesis) I am not going to object to him using the Elo formula to calculate an irrelevant probability.
There is so much worse and more relevant to draw attention to!
While I would expect probabilities predicted by the Elo system to be less accurate for large rating differences (a scientifically testable hypothesis) I am not going to object to him using the Elo formula to calculate an irrelevant probability.
There is so much worse and more relevant to draw attention to!
true lol, tygxc does like to throw random irrelevant "facts" to sound like he knows what he's talking about.
.
i dont have those anymore
Not really. She tries to act young, though. Comes off more crazy than young and carefree.
ohh yuck hes back
Just think of the number of keystrokes that could be saved, inside this "tail-chasing thread," if everyone simply aqreed with the measured comment provided by Elroch below --
"They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw."
As a result -- all of us would more time to actually play the royal game. What's not to like about that possibility?
"Mathematics," writ large, notwithstanding. Ha!
hê lô chơi fi fai rất vui
Yeah i showed tygxc’s stuff to my college professor in maths and he was like what is this bogus?
but thats the whole thing...wudda they know ?...mosta them are lazies who sit around tryn2make conversation abt stuff w/out an value...really !
"They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw."
its just more probability...doesnt ans a/t. iows indifference. go ahead. be ridiculously ignorant about (2) propositions and assign the same value to each. lol !
summa u have a lot to learn (if ur still young enuf...)
There is time for both, @zborg, although the value of it may be in question...
Indeed, perhaps the "answer" to most binary questions is "both?"
Because we live in a macroscopic, quantum mechanical world, and HUMAN AGENCY remains always present, thus rendering the future uncertain.
[Bold / Bald Assertion] -- the only place where all our binary questions are answered is inside the MULTIVERSE.
But that's a discussion for yet another massively posted thread, is it not? Ha!
There is time for both, @zborg, although the value of it may be in question...
Excellent. I am finally beginning to comprehend your (evident) persuasiveness. Thank you for your erudition. Much appreciated, today. 
"Time enables quality"
Just think of the number of keystrokes that could be saved, inside this "tail-chasing thread," if everyone simply aqreed with the measured comment provided by Elroch below --
"They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw."
That's a reasonable point. Although, assuming that chess is a draw isn't really the issue (for me).
A complete tablebase, with "Draw" or "Distance-to-Mate" listed for every possible position - now there's the real challenge ...
Yeah i showed tygxc’s stuff to my college professor in maths and he was like what is this bogus?
but thats the whole thing...wudda they know ?...mosta them are lazies who sit around tryn2make conversation abt stuff w/out an value...really !
wow you assume many things about college, have you ever been on one?
But there are many tactics puzzles positions where there's a single best move.
Over 50,000 of such puzzles available on chess.com.
How many 'one best move' positions are there in all of chess?
Nobody knows.
Because that 4x 10^44 number of possible positions is just Too Daunting to find all of those.
Most such one best positions on the website come from games or studies.
But perhaps the tablebase projects are generating more of them.
Will you win a game against Carlsen? Certainly not. more precisely: 0.0000541%
People with advanced mathematical qualifications understand that 0.000000541 does not equal zero.
They understand the same applies to a good guess that chess is a draw.
They understand that you need random events to be independent in order to multiply probabilities.
For some reason, you aren't even capable of learning that when told.
But tygxc ... the T-guy recently maintained that he knows better and more than everybody else here.
He doesn't usually say that directly.
But could that be behind all of his thousands of posts here for two years now?
Trying to send that message - whether believing it or not?
I believe that the T-guy has enough intelligence to not believe such a thing - (unlike the absent guy)
But even if Tguy actually entertains such a notion about himself - he's had enough intelligence not to constantly spam it directly. Unlike the absent guy.
But does T actually internally entertain such thinking?
Is that what has caused his thousands of posts here the last two years?
Curious.
Yeah i showed tygxc’s stuff to my college professor in maths and he was like what is this bogus?