Nakamura defeats Rybka in a loooong game

Naka was just teaching Rybka some manners. Any computer with manners would have resigned much sooner.

This is actually a really awesome chess game- showing how computers can't play blocked positions at all. It should totally have been a draw.

I start to like Nakamura. I didn't know he has a fine humor.

It is wrong to say that Nakamura knew from the beginning that he would win. He just demonstrated for a large part of the game, that his position was impenetrable. (He knew that computers keep giving evaluations like +0.50 or even +1.0 after - wrongly - closing the last files.)

His humor came out when he sacrified one after another two exchanges ( without being forced to do so=. It takes high skills (more than just elo 2100) to see that the position was still equal.

He couldn't know that Rybka would be 'provoked' and make some terribly wrong decisions (sacrifice of two pawns, to open up lines for his rooks). Because of the (still) limited scope of the white rooks and the active Black king, the white position was lost after that.

I guess, a program of today (FIVE years later, when we also have faster processors), would reject such odd decisions with, say, ply 20.

So you are saying Nakamura played a match, from which he lost several first games to find out the game settings of the engine , until he finally won JUST one game ?

This makes his achievement not look so great. I think that Nakamura might have STILL not knowing the outcome, and being in the process of guessing the 'settings' and strength/vulnerability of Rybka. May be, he was lucky to hit an ill point for once ?

I cannot believe that the settings were put at: 'reject all threefold repetitions'. It is well-known to club players that there are cases when such absolute preference can lead to a loss of a game.

Anyway, the game is amusing, and nice.

If the horizon of all variants that evaluate correctly an idea/plan/strategem is too far, then the program may not find it . Because it does not know strategy and abstraction. 

How do u get a rating of 1219 in bullet when u can't tell the difference between rooks and bishops?

Impressive technique from the greatest American chessplayer in the history of the world!  I really like how his play said, "With all due respect Mr.Rybka, but your bishop won't target my pawns in the endgame while my pawns cover where my bishop can't, and I shall keep this position closed enough where my knight pair trumps your bishop pair!"

Seemed like a lot of useless shuffling though, but of course someone like me would perceive such as "useless" while Nakamura understood the deep strategic ideas behind it. 

agreed why didn't Nakamura just beat him? promote a queen or two and that is game. how much time did he have?

personally i don't care if  computers can beat anything. Really just forget the computers and play with people although computers are nice for analysing

It seems that someone worships the computers and has contempt for the world's greatest human chess players.  Perhaps that is due to his 1063 rating in Online Chess.

In the end, this game showed the brilliance and creativity of Nakamura.  He willingly gave up two exchange sacs.  He was even able to embarrass Rybka, by underpromoting so many times.

he is good

try beating computer yourself then

Too bad it took you 14 years to come up with this brilliant riposte.

I didn't exist when the game was played, It only took my lifetime to find out.

Stockfish always gets the last laugh.

You aren't getting the other half, you see, the Rybka bot is programmed to not make draws, so it played those horrible moves to not make a draw. Hikaru, knowing this, exploited the errors of the bot and repeated so that the bot would mess up.

Very sarcastic.