Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Developers Forum

Developers Forum

  1. Standard member Arrakis
    D_U_N_E
    05 Aug '04 20:37
    There can be many reasons why someone might not want to play against a certain player... but at the top of my category is when I put the game into Fritz after I lose to see how I could've played better and discover that my opponent played every move suggested by the computer program! The odds of any player matching a computer's play for 40 moves straight are astronomical!

    Since RHP has no defense against computer cheaters, it should allow us to have a NO-PLAY list, which can be used for our clan matches and tournament play.

    arrakis, alias Don Vandivier - former computer buster for the ICC.
  2. Standard member opsoccergurl11
    rockin soccer kid
    10 Aug '04 00:47
    in tournaments, just lok and make sure that person isnt signed up. for clans, just tell your clan leader you dont want to play them
  3. 17 Aug '04 15:29
    Good idea!

    As for "tell your clan leader ..." .... what's the best and easiest way to organize and publish a list of players? Ah ... have the site track it as part of your profile.
  4. Standard member TheMaster37
    Kupikupopo!
    17 Aug '04 17:18
    Originally posted by arrakis
    There can be many reasons why someone might not want to play against a certain player... but at the top of my category is when I put the game into Fritz after I lose to see how I could've played better and discover that my opponent played every move suggested by the computer program! The odds of any player matching a computer's play for 40 moves straight ...[text shortened]... es and tournament play.

    arrakis, alias Don Vandivier - former computer buster for the ICC.
    Report this to Russ. The chances for that are very very small (not astronomical, lol, that is used to indicate a huge chance :p)
  5. Standard member KellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    22 Sep '04 00:03
    Originally posted by arrakis
    There can be many reasons why someone might not want to play against a certain player... but at the top of my category is when I put the game into Fritz after I lose to see how I could've played better and discover that my opponent played every move suggested by the computer program! The odds of any player matching a computer's play for 40 moves straight ...[text shortened]... es and tournament play.

    arrakis, alias Don Vandivier - former computer buster for the ICC.
    A no read filter would be nice too. If a poster becomes someone
    you do not care to see again, yet has not done anything wrong.
    It would be nice to simply not see them.
    Kelly
  6. 28 Sep '04 23:35
    Originally posted by TheMaster37
    Report this to Russ. The chances for that are very very small (not astronomical, lol, that is used to indicate a huge chance :p)
    Sorry to correct you but he didn't say that the chances were astronomical, he said the odds were astronomical which is correct.
  7. 20 Dec '04 05:55
    Originally posted by arrakis
    There can be many reasons why someone might not want to play against a certain player... but at the top of my category is when I put the game into Fritz after I lose to see how I could've played better and discover that my opponent played every move suggested by the computer program! The odds of any player matching a computer's play for 40 moves straight ...[text shortened]... es and tournament play.

    arrakis, alias Don Vandivier - former computer buster for the ICC.
    I disagree on the odds of following a computer program for 40 moves.
    If your program is worth anything then it is replaying grandmaster level games - I have seen you and many other of the hire up ratings play exactly this way, I go back over my games using Various books and see you playing Xth variation on the Y opening. Chess is limited in there are only 64 squares, 32 pieces and only so many positions to move them all into, any of you rated 1700 and above play these games just as if you were a computer. thoses of us below that are making more human mistakes like dropping pieces or pawns.
    Really good players will likely be playing the same moves as a really good computer program simply because the moves are good!
    Fred
  8. Standard member TRACKHEAD21
    Total Domination
    04 Jan '05 13:44
    Originally posted by fhbchess
    I disagree on the odds of following a computer program for 40 moves.
    If your program is worth anything then it is replaying grandmaster level games - I have seen you and many other of the hire up ratings play exactly this way, I go back over my games using Various books and see you playing Xth variation on the Y opening. Chess is limited in there are only ...[text shortened]... laying the same moves as a really good computer program simply because the moves are good!
    Fred
    This is totally incorrect and I won't even go into why. You should read one of the many threads about human vs machine moves. Someone posted analysis of a game between me and cludi both of us good, high rated players. In a complete game our moves matched only half of the engines 1st choice moves and included moves the engine didnt even consider, so please don't think that a good players moves will be the same as a good engine. The only players moves that will be the same as a good engine are those who are using that good engine to play chess on the site.

    Furthermore I like the idea of a No-Play list. Sure you could tell your clan leader but for me personally my list would be too big. Plus doing this is basically accussing someone of using an engine. With a no play list no one knows but you. This no play list would not have an affect in tournaments though but it would be nice if you would get a message reminding you that someone on your no-play list has entered or is already entered in a tournament you are in.
  9. 06 Sep '06 15:04
    Originally posted by fhbchess
    I disagree on the odds of following a computer program for 40 moves.
    If your program is worth anything then it is replaying grandmaster level games - I have seen you and many other of the hire up ratings play exactly this way, I go back over my games using Various books and see you playing Xth variation on the Y opening. Chess is limited in there are only ...[text shortened]... laying the same moves as a really good computer program simply because the moves are good!
    Fred
    Hmm. Looks like we need a bit of a reality check here. Chess is an NP-complete problem which is why there is not a simple strategy that always wins (unlike tic-tac-toe which does). Chess also has a very large number of move permutations.

    According to the founding father of information-theory (which derives from complexity theory and game-theory) Shannon estimates that an average game is 40 moves long and on average each move has 30 different possible moves, of which only 1 is chosen.

    If moves were chosen randomly, we are already at a 1 / (30^40) liklihood that a computer/person perfect match would occur.

    In reality however, some of these moves are (to be blunt) ridiculous, and so a good player may hav between 3 and 4 moves to choose from at random. This amounts to a 1 / (3^40) chance. (about 0.00000000000000000008.2252633399699. This means that if you played 12157665459056928801 games, you would expect statistically 1 of these games to be played identical to the computer suggested move.
  10. 06 Sep '06 15:08
    PS. If this the statement that grandmasters play like machines anyway, the game would be tedius for them and they would give up playing, and anyway the grandmasters would always draw against each other (since they both always choose the best move) and would always draw against a machine.

    Since we all know that more than one grandmaster tournaments have ended in a victory for one of the players rather than a draw, and simmilarly many grandmasters have failed against computers such as deep-blue, we know the above statement of equivilence between optimal-moves and human players does not exist.

    QED.
  11. Standard member XanthosNZ
    Cancerous Bus Crash
    07 Sep '06 03:43
    Hmmm looks like someone needs a lesson on not bumping 2 year old threads.
  12. Standard member skeeter
    515 + 30 days
    20 Oct '06 04:55
    Originally posted by XanthosNZ
    Hmmm looks like someone needs a lesson on not bumping 2 year old threads.
    Hmmmm...looks like the pot calling the kettle black. Again.

    skeeter