Human versus Machine

Sort:
Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

This one was played without contempt.

No, people say otherwise: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

I hope at some point new reviews appear about 'Human vs Machine' that will demonstrate this even more clearly.

All you are able to do is accuse.

Why don't you learn something instead?

Avatar of Iam2busy
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Elroch wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

On above diagram a7-a5 simply draws, and that will be seen by EVERYONE on this forum, but SF has MISSED it!

HobbyPlayer, please don't post such absurd games any more.

Your <2100 strength clearly transpires.

If you want to learn real chess, the knowledge is here, no take-backs: https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Chess-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/dp/1522041400

 

It is also true that you do not have a legitimate very high rating yourself - self-awarded ones really don't count (your old rating is very respectable, but bears no resemblance to your wacky claims).

You might prefer to have a ratified public match against an engine to demonstrate your skills. chess.com might be up for validating such an impressive show, and this would be tremendous publicity for you. What sort of result could you achieve, under what conditions?

^^^

Just as Elroch says. If chess.com could host one for you, you'd be famous overnight! Your book sales would soar sky high! But until then, you continue to have this everyday.

 

If you really want your book to be a success, then play some games. Don't give me the excuse that you're working on a book, because that book will also get the same reactions. The tide will change for you if you were to play openly.

 

We know each other, you want to put on me the burden for something you should do yourself: try to investigate my book. I have walked my part of the road, now it is yours.

That is where you are failing. I understand that you've put in a lot of work to write your book, but your customers won't "walk their part of the road" before buying your book. That's like asking Google to hire you when you don't have a proper  education!

I will never ask Google to hire me.

Check again IM Welling's review: https://www.chess.com/blog/Swordfish55/review-the-secret-of-chess

When strong tilted players support your work, your credentials are boosted, don't you think? That's true, but it's still not good enough. Begging others for reviews won't help prove much about your book, Mr.Tsvetkov.

Concerning my education, oh, you should learn for 200 years to attain that.

That was an example. Google would never hire you!

 

I don't beg anyone to hire me.

They should beg to hire me.

Authors don't beg.

My gosh...

Are you for real?

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

I am asking myself that about you.

 

Avatar of Iam2busy

I am only trying to help your book reach new heights...

Avatar of chesster3145
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Elroch wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

On above diagram a7-a5 simply draws, and that will be seen by EVERYONE on this forum, but SF has MISSED it!

HobbyPlayer, please don't post such absurd games any more.

Your <2100 strength clearly transpires.

If you want to learn real chess, the knowledge is here, no take-backs: https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Chess-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/dp/1522041400

 

It is also true that you do not have a legitimate very high rating yourself - self-awarded ones really don't count (your old rating is very respectable, but bears no resemblance to your wacky claims).

You might prefer to have a ratified public match against an engine to demonstrate your skills. chess.com might be up for validating such an impressive show, and this would be tremendous publicity for you. What sort of result could you achieve, under what conditions?

^^^

Just as Elroch says. If chess.com could host one for you, you'd be famous overnight! Your book sales would soar sky high! But until then, you continue to have this everyday.

 

If you really want your book to be a success, then play some games. Don't give me the excuse that you're working on a book, because that book will also get the same reactions. The tide will change for you if you were to play openly.

 

We know each other, you want to put on me the burden for something you should do yourself: try to investigate my book. I have walked my part of the road, now it is yours.

That is where you are failing. I understand that you've put in a lot of work to write your book, but your customers won't "walk their part of the road" before buying your book. That's like asking Google to hire you when you don't have a proper  education!

I will never ask Google to hire me.

Check again IM Welling's review: https://www.chess.com/blog/Swordfish55/review-the-secret-of-chess

When strong tilted players support your work, your credentials are boosted, don't you think? That's true, but it's still not good enough. Begging others for reviews won't help prove much about your book, Mr.Tsvetkov.

Concerning my education, oh, you should learn for 200 years to attain that.

That was an example. Google would never hire you!

 

I don't beg anyone to hire me.

They should beg to hire me.

Authors don't beg.

My gosh...

Are you for real?

I know, right? With that view, he might not be able to get another day job wink.png

Avatar of chesster3145
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

This one was played without contempt.

No, people say otherwise: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

I hope at some point new reviews appear about 'Human vs Machine' that will demonstrate this even more clearly.

All you are able to do is accuse.

Why don't you learn something instead?

Then what’s your explanation for the absurd engine evals?

Avatar of FBloggs

Good Lord!  How many threads does this guy have?

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
Iam2busy wrote:

I am only trying to help your book reach new heights...

I am sure about it. happy.png

If you would, you would visit my site, www.secretofchess.com, to read some excerpts and consider the real value of the book.

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
 

chesster3145 wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:
Elroch wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

On above diagram a7-a5 simply draws, and that will be seen by EVERYONE on this forum, but SF has MISSED it!

HobbyPlayer, please don't post such absurd games any more.

Your <2100 strength clearly transpires.

If you want to learn real chess, the knowledge is here, no take-backs: https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Chess-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/dp/1522041400

 

It is also true that you do not have a legitimate very high rating yourself - self-awarded ones really don't count (your old rating is very respectable, but bears no resemblance to your wacky claims).

You might prefer to have a ratified public match against an engine to demonstrate your skills. chess.com might be up for validating such an impressive show, and this would be tremendous publicity for you. What sort of result could you achieve, under what conditions?

^^^

Just as Elroch says. If chess.com could host one for you, you'd be famous overnight! Your book sales would soar sky high! But until then, you continue to have this everyday.

 

If you really want your book to be a success, then play some games. Don't give me the excuse that you're working on a book, because that book will also get the same reactions. The tide will change for you if you were to play openly.

 

We know each other, you want to put on me the burden for something you should do yourself: try to investigate my book. I have walked my part of the road, now it is yours.

That is where you are failing. I understand that you've put in a lot of work to write your book, but your customers won't "walk their part of the road" before buying your book. That's like asking Google to hire you when you don't have a proper  education!

I will never ask Google to hire me.

Check again IM Welling's review: https://www.chess.com/blog/Swordfish55/review-the-secret-of-chess

When strong tilted players support your work, your credentials are boosted, don't you think? That's true, but it's still not good enough. Begging others for reviews won't help prove much about your book, Mr.Tsvetkov.

Concerning my education, oh, you should learn for 200 years to attain that.

That was an example. Google would never hire you!

 

I don't beg anyone to hire me.

They should beg to hire me.

Authors don't beg.

My gosh...

Are you for real?

I know, right? With that view, he might not be able to get another day job 

I don't need it.

Once I convince you, IamBusy and BreakingBad to buy the book. happy.png

 

See how I am able to handle Komodo with the full set of pieces.

 

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
chesster3145 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

This one was played without contempt.

No, people say otherwise: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

I hope at some point new reviews appear about 'Human vs Machine' that will demonstrate this even more clearly.

All you are able to do is accuse.

Why don't you learn something instead?

Then what’s your explanation for the absurd engine evals?

What absurd engine evals?

Give an example, post a diagram, so we can discuss it.

Otherwise, yours are just words.

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
FBloggs wrote:

Good Lord!  How many threads does this guy have?

You want to say, how many creative ideas he has. happy.png

Avatar of chesster3145
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
chesster3145 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

This one was played without contempt.

No, people say otherwise: https://www.expert-chess-strategies.com/human-versus-machine.html

I hope at some point new reviews appear about 'Human vs Machine' that will demonstrate this even more clearly.

All you are able to do is accuse.

Why don't you learn something instead?

Then what’s your explanation for the absurd engine evals?

What absurd engine evals?

Give an example, post a diagram, so we can discuss it.

Otherwise, yours are just words.

Posts #341 and #351, where the given engine evals swing from -220 pawns to -1000 and from -77 to +1000.

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov

Well that is natural, one side starts winning, and the score changes, equal means 0.0, when you are close to mate, the score rises to 1000cps and above, nothing unnatural here.

I recommend you get a good engine guide before posting similar pointless statements.

Btw., it is not pawns, but centipawns, 220 full pawns would be too much, would not it, the small 64-square board would hardly shelter as many as 220 pawns.

100 centipawns equals one full pawn material, if you don't know.

Engines always return their scores in centipawns.

Avatar of chesster3145
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Well that is natural, one side starts winning, and the score changes, equal means 0.0, when you are close to mate, the score rises to 1000cps and above, nothing unnatural here.

I recommend you get a good engine guide before posting similar pointless statements.

Btw., it is not pawns, but centipawns, 220 full pawns would be too much, would not it, the small 64-square board would hardly shelter as many as 220 pawns.

100 centipawns equals one full pawn material, if you don't know.

Engines always return their scores in centipawns.

Then why is the engine eval after 1. e4 in Post #341 -220.20?

Avatar of FBloggs
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
FBloggs wrote:

Good Lord!  How many threads does this guy have?

You want to say, how many creative ideas he has.

Why on earth would I want to say that?  It would be a compliment.

Avatar of Iam2busy
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:

I am only trying to help your book reach new heights...

I am sure about it.

If you would, you would visit my site, www.secretofchess.com, to read some excerpts and consider the real value of the book.

I already have.

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
chesster3145 wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:

Well that is natural, one side starts winning, and the score changes, equal means 0.0, when you are close to mate, the score rises to 1000cps and above, nothing unnatural here.

I recommend you get a good engine guide before posting similar pointless statements.

Btw., it is not pawns, but centipawns, 220 full pawns would be too much, would not it, the small 64-square board would hardly shelter as many as 220 pawns.

100 centipawns equals one full pawn material, if you don't know.

Engines always return their scores in centipawns.

Then why is the engine eval after 1. e4 in Post #341 -220.20?

Because, it is a handicap position, if you are looking well.

It is knight on b1 for c7 pawn.

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
FBloggs wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
FBloggs wrote:

Good Lord!  How many threads does this guy have?

You want to say, how many creative ideas he has.

Why on earth would I want to say that?  It would be a compliment.

Because you want to compliment me. happy.png

Avatar of Lyudmil_Tsvetkov
Iam2busy wrote:
Lyudmil_Tsvetkov wrote:
Iam2busy wrote:

I am only trying to help your book reach new heights...

I am sure about it.

If you would, you would visit my site, www.secretofchess.com, to read some excerpts and consider the real value of the book.

I already have.

Good for you, then you have returned enlightened. happy.png

Avatar of GWTR

Two days ago, I bought Human Versus Machine, Part 1 off amazon.com.

It is awesome.

I dig the section on pawns in The Secret of Chess, but the rest is over my head.

Well, over my head until I read https://www.amazon.com/Human-Versus-Machine-Stockfish-Komodo-ebook/dp/B0768G8R2C/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=


Now I see clearly