"An awesome of Helltanks".
Fischer vs. Houdini, WHO WOULD WIN??
Sort:
sarsaila wrote:
DeepGreene wrote:
Are we talking chess, or a taking-punches-to-the-stomach contest?
This is the only chess that will be discussed here. For serious things, you should go to chesspub.
Do they have free booze?
Even I, Deep Shredder 12 couldn't beat Houdini... I admit that Houdini is the greatest chess player in the Universe.
GMLoveJr wrote:
That is really an unfair question because Houdini is highly predictable. It only makes the best possible moves in any given position so all you would have to do is study the first 3 best moves per move you make and you can come out with a draw but No human being will ever beat Houdini the best anyone can ever do is draw either by 3 move repetition or 50 move rule. Houdini will never makes less than the top 3 best moves no matter what position so if you make perfect moves it will make perfect moves also ending up in a draw. I think given a few weeks of studying Houdini Fischer could have managed to draw all games played but thats the most he could have ever done.
Truth
Thanks for bumping this thread before getting yourself banned
Later on in life, after he had given up chess, RJF took up mixed martial arts, and he did slay many a great warrior with his tactical genius and cunning fists of fury, and many did he confuse as to the source of his inspiration and power. It was common knowledge that RJF grew a beard late in life, and it was rumored that under that beard there was no longer a chin......... there was only another fist.
Stay thirsty my friends.
Paul Morhpy would sacrifice all the pieces like he does always and Houdini would take all the pieces like a "machine" and then Morphy Mate to Houdini buh bye. But the opposite would happen in lightning, bullet or blitz game.
Morphy would beat anyone if he was able to play them enough times to get a sense of their style. Capablanca too. The real question is who'd win in chess960, a better test of chess understanding. Nakamura so far is king.
heinzie wrote:
Thanks for bumping this thread before getting yourself banned
Still, if there was any area where he had a certain measure of expertise...
Houdini would easily win sorry to say . i love the greats but come now people lets look at reality here.
houdini on a good computer will kill all . we have yet to see a GM demonstrate how to defeate it. and im not talking about defeating it on a crappy computer.
Feb 17, 2012
0
#73
If Houdini had an iPhone version, there are few GMs who could beat it. Fischer, now being where he is, plays the Caro-Kann exclusively. With such a defense, he might survive the iPhone's attack.
GMLoveJr wrote:
That is really an unfair question because Houdini is highly predictable. It only makes the best possible moves in any given position so all you would have to do is study the first 3 best moves per move you make and you can come out with a draw but No human being will ever beat Houdini the best anyone can ever do is draw either by 3 move repetition or 50 move rule. Houdini will never makes less than the top 3 best moves no matter what position so if you make perfect moves it will make perfect moves also ending up in a draw.
If Houdini could always make the best possible move, then all you would have to do is have Houdini play itself and chess would be solved. Since I haven't heard that chess was solved, I can not believe that Houdini always makes the best possible move.
pfren wrote:
Provided ample thinking time, Fisher would easily win in normal chess
I doubt that, Kramnik played Deep Fritz 10 in 2006 and lost 2-4, and that with several restrictions for the engine (I don't recall the details but they had to do with the opening book, tablebases and adjournments). Looking at the engine rating lists Houdini is the maybe strongest engine in the world while Deep Fritz 10 was many hundred Elo points weaker, so I think no one would beat it easily.
no chess engine or human makes the best possible move all the time . Also It will be at least 100 more years before they solve chess. its going to take untill 2015 just to solve the 7 piece tablebase for god sakes yet alone 32. point being we dont still know if the best moves result in a draw. Its still highly possible that white should win everytime from the start but of course only a machine will beable to demonstrate this. In addintio , I doubt anyone can find the best move everytime like a computer. like for instance the move Re8 preparing qe3 for purp in the deep blue kasparov 1997 game 2. kasparov lost because he did not see the draw as being possible.
the last notable human vs machine game ended with the conclusion : "i will never play a machine ever again". perhaps it was due to engine playing non-sense in closed positions. Today , top engines are much more powerfull then it were ,say, 10 years ago and it is nonsense to even compare a human , be that top player ,to machines that analyse billions of moves and almost pass 3400 ELO .
Has any of the top 10 GM's in the world managed to squeeze a draw with the best engine (Houdini , Rybka properly configured) ? I doubt it. Machines will be machines - people will be people.
I don't know how CC and aged laptops get along but I presume this article proves your point of "no motivation" .
The reasons GM don't play top engines has nothing to do with "motivation" (money) .
It is because getting crushed is annoying especially if your are top GM. I realise that engines are not error free but it's enough to kick your ass in 4 games out of 6 as it proves my point.
i really don't know why you have brought CC into discussion as it really proves nothing. The fact that a real life IM and CC GM titled player is champion there again proves nothing.
CC is not very popular and it does not get too much attention - perhaps this is why you don't see a patzer winning WC title there. Only the fact that i saw Valutanu Marius in the top 15 CC players (Top list accorind to ICCF) with a CC rating of 2647 and he is a 1560 elo rated player in OTB... proves my point.
Again , all you know about the current champ in CC is because THEY tell you. You have no ideea if he paid to use a custom engine version made specifically for him , you don't know how he configured the engine , what engine and so on...
I could bet anytime that a dedicated system with a 12-core processor and a *properly configured* houdini(with pondering enabled and a 2 day / move time) would be the champ. Be that a GM and/or a patzer using it.
And again you miss out the fact that todays engines improve with everygame they loose.
Just for the heck of it : Can you post here a game with Nikolai beating a top engine in CC (Houdini or Rybka 4)? Or anyone that has a game in wich they won against an top engine in CC. Please post it here. WON! Not draw!
Feb 21, 2012
0
#80
clocky wrote:
i really don't know why you have brought CC into discussion as it really proves nothing. The fact that a real life IM and CC GM titled player is champion there again proves nothing.
CC is not very popular and it does not get too much attention - perhaps this is why you don't see a patzer winning WC title there. Only the fact that i saw Valutanu Marius in the top 15 CC players (Top list accorind to ICCF) with a CC rating of 2647 and he is a 1560 elo rated player in OTB... proves my point.
Again , all you know about the current champ in CC is because THEY tell you. You have no ideea if he paid to use a custom engine version made specifically for him , you don't know how he configured the engine , what engine and so on...
I could bet anytime that a dedicated system with a 12-core processor and a *properly configured* houdini(with pondering enabled and a 2 day / move time) would be the champ. Be that a GM and/or a patzer using it.
And again you miss out the fact that todays engines improve with everygame they loose.
Just for the heck of it : Can you post here a game with Nikolai beating a top engine in CC (Houdini or Rybka 4)? Or anyone that has a game in wich they won against an top engine in CC. Please post it here. WON! Not draw!
I'm not sure but Hydra may have been a better chess player than the modern engines running on a decent Desktop computer. Arno Nickel won a match 2-0 against Hydra.
There's a huge difference between CC and OTB, so of course bringing up CC is relevant to the discussion.
Fischer said he could draw with God if he had white and they were playing the Ruy Lopez. I take that to mean he would be less confident if God played the Sicilian or if God had white.
I'm not sure if God has a substantially higher ELO than Houdini. If their rating is similar, than Fischer might make the same prediction with the same conditions.
For various reasons, I doubt if the Fischer vs. God chess game has actually taken place. Also, now that Fischer is a dead guy, he really can't play Houdini. Although in fairness, Houdini isn't alive either so maybe it's equal on that count.
I think the most we can hope for is a God vs. Houdini match.
Really, you think Fischer went to heaven?
More likely he's downstairs - playing chess with that red guy. And winning.
Not being in heaven is among the "various reasons" I doubt the Fischer vs. God match has taken place. No heaven would also present a problem.
Besides if God doesn't play dice, he may not play board games.
Yeah but if the match does occur in heaven, at least Fischer won't be able to complain about the lighting.
He will complain about the harps in the background, and his demon guards who will escort him to hell afterwards