Originally posted by BigDoggProblemBooks still leave you with choices to make. You can't plug the book into your computer and get it to make the move for you.
No it doesn't. "Books" covers endgame books and middlegame books too!
The idea of playing with 'just your own effort' is an illusion. You can't play the game well without borrowing (many) ideas from chess theory.
Originally posted by tmetzlerYup.
And there are many more being investigated. One at a time...
Cheaters beware.
--tmetzler
As I've said in a message before, our time was wasted until Russ finally did something... and this was not an overnight thing as much as some of you seem to think. LOTS of work was done, and lots of work to be done.
P-
Originally posted by orfeoYes and no. You can play book openings by rote. The only 'choice' involved is what line to play and what to do if the opponent deviates from the book line.
Books still leave you with choices to make. You can't plug the book into your computer and get it to make the move for you.
Book endgames don't require any choice. Just do exactly as the book says, and you'll get the right result. (If the book is right, that is!)
There are also positions where Fritz considers 2 or move moves to be about equally strong, so the engine user would have to make a choice.
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemHmmm... an engine will always pick what it thinks is the best Book Move. There might be more than one line from a position, so the engine might have 2 or more options and will go with what it thinks is the best book move... where I will need to decide on my own.
Yes and no. You can play book openings by rote. The only 'choice' involved is what line to play and what to do if the opponent deviates from the book line.
Book endgames don't require any choice. Just do exactly as the book says, and you'll get the right result. (If the book is right, that is!)
There are also positions where Fritz con ...[text shortened]... ders 2 or move moves to be about equally strong, so the engine user would have to make a choice.
When you ask an engine what move it should make in a book, it will never come back and say... "I don't know, these are just as good as the other... what do YOU think?"
P-
Originally posted by StarrmanWriting on only one cup of coffee is a very bad thing for me . (I'm just waking up over here.)
dude...
Edit : "Dude" back attcha - You misspelled my misspelling : I origionally typed "mant" , you quoted me as typing "munt" . I know you'll be shattered by this , but you're no Bowmann .
Originally posted by RagnorakTis not a dark day....the dark days were when RHP's No1 was a database......these are the days of light where we have a new and honest NO1.............
While I'm delighted to have seen the action taken by disclosing the names of proven cheaters, I have to say I'm pretty disgusted as to how it was brought about.
I think it is terrible that the person who can shout the loudest the longest in the forums and create the most discontent and ill feeling amongst users, is now setting the priorities for the site.
I can really feel the love in these forums tonight.
D
My friend dominic 0987 wasent a cheater?? I think russ has made a big mistake! i know him and i know he wouldnt cheat. He is the only one in the list who has a really low rating he is normally rated around 1300 or something. He loses against 1200s and lower check his rating graph? These he lost just a little while ago some of them a couple of days ago.
Game 1340886
Game 1317184
Game 1340681
Game 1226299
I don't often get pissed off but I am right now. Badly. If anything, this latest cheaters expose has all but solidified my decision to join my local club and play otb more often. In that way, I can see who I'm playing and whether they're human or not !!!
I'll still play at RHP as I have done for the last 3 years, but when I look at my modest improvements over the years how do I know they're real? The games (and there are many) that I've lost to lower rated players.....was I losing to a computer??
The higher rated players I won against - was this due to an unwitting anti-computer move on my part??
It sounds trite to say, but although I play chess for fun I am serious about improving. And despite what I've said, I'm sure I have done. I'll never get round how some people can actually find it enjoyable to win a game by methods other than their own efforts.
I'm off to get drunk - see you all on Monday when battle (fair battle) recommences.....
Originally posted by The Fast PawnI can't believe you lost in 4 moves to that patzer ian93.
My friend dominic 0987 wasent a cheater?? I think russ has made a big mistake! i know him and i know he wouldnt cheat. He is the only one in the list who has a really low rating he is normally rated around 1300 or something. He loses against 1200s and lower check his rating graph? These he lost just a little while ago some of them a couple of days ago.
Game 1340886
Game 1317184
Game 1340681
Game 1226299
How is James Woodley doing these days?