Originally posted by RJHindsYou are too stupid to know what I should do. Why don`t you answer the question? Nobody with more or less decent chess skills has doubts about your inability to reach 2200 here with honest play.
You should ask yourself, "Does Jesus approve of my judgment?"
Staying on topic - interview with Borislav Ivanov
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8781
"Of course I practiced a lot with the computer, and after beating Rybka and Houdini by 10-0 each, i was absolutelly sure that no-one was gonna stop me winning." 😀
"Well I have been playing chess for about ten years, but 2012 was the first time I started learning seriously the chess theory and practising with a computer." - this one reminds me of "analyze board" excuses. 😀
- Joined
- 06 Aug 07
- Moves
- 8299
Originally posted by RJHindsSorry, I guess I was not clear. My comments regarding a3 were not addressed towards the c5 line (which I do not like) for black but towards the black Qe7 line.
I think you are missing the point. White is able to exchange off a bishop file pawn for a rook file pawn immediately by 6.a3. In the orignal posted game this did not happen until move 9 after the fianchetto on the kingside. But look what happened in this last game in which black wins.
Well, I agree that Qe7 and Be7 look better than c5 for black.
Originally posted by PacifiqueDummy! An analyze board can not be used in OTB chess. On RHP, we are allowed to use an analyze board. Why else would it be provided? Do you really think it is for postgame analysis only?
Staying on topic - interview with Borislav Ivanov
http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=8781
"Of course I practiced a lot with the computer, and after beating Rybka and Houdini by 10-0 each, i was absolutelly sure that no-one was gonna stop me winning." 😀
"Well I have been playing chess for about ten years, but 2012 was the first time I ...[text shortened]... eory and practising with a computer." - this one reminds me of "analyze board" excuses. 😀
RHP wants us to use the analyze board during the game, plus opening and ending books, master games, and our previous games so that we might learn to play better chess. If you refuse to use it, then don't blame others for your dismal results.
P.S. However, I am doubtful that this guy could beat the strong computer chess programs by 10-0, perhaps a less strong chess computer.
Originally posted by RJHindsLOL. My point was - his excuses was equally idiotic with yours. His claims about 10-0 vs Houdini & Rybka means that he is idiot like you.
Dummy! An analyze board can not be used in OTB chess. On RHP, we are allowed to use an analyze board. Why else would it be provided? Do you really think it is for postgame analysis only?
RHP wants us to use the analyze board during the game, plus opening and ending books, master games, and our previous games so that we might learn to play better chess. ...[text shortened]... uy could beat the strong computer chess programs by 10-0, perhaps a less strong chess computer.
http://ratings.fide.com/view_games.phtml?id=2903741&name=%22Ivanov__Borislav(BUL
I've analysed games which were played most recently prior to Zadar 19th.
I wanted a medium sized batch, so I chose the first 13 games which all have 20 or more non-database moves. A couple of games were excluded because they're too short.
Pre-Zadar 19th:
Houdini 1.5a x64 Hash:256 Time:30s Max Depth:20ply
{ Ivanov, Borislav (Games: 13) }
{ Top 1 Match: 203/414 ( 49.0% ) Opponents: 217/416 ( 52.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 287/414 ( 69.3% ) Opponents: 296/416 ( 71.2% )
{ Top 3 Match: 330/414 ( 79.7% ) Opponents: 323/416 ( 77.6% )
{ Top 4 Match: 352/414 ( 85.0% ) Opponents: 343/416 ( 82.5% )
Zadar 19th:
Houdini 1.5a x64 Hash:256 Time:30s Max Depth:20ply
{ Borislav Ivanov (Games: 9) }
{ Top 1 Match: 210/314 ( 66.9% ) Opponents: 150/313 ( 47.9% )
{ Top 2 Match: 270/314 ( 86.0% ) Opponents: 207/313 ( 66.1% )
{ Top 3 Match: 285/314 ( 90.8% ) Opponents: 238/313 ( 76.0% )
{ Top 4 Match: 293/314 ( 93.3% ) Opponents: 267/313 ( 85.3% )
But that isn't the full story.
According to the chessbase article, the live feed was interrupted during round 8 which was the game Ivanov lost against GM Predojevic, so it would be interesting (and some would say fair) to remove that game from the results.
Doing so yields the following match rate:
Zadar 19th:
Houdini 1.5a x64 Hash:256 Time:30s Max Depth:20ply
{ Borislav Ivanov (Games: ) }
{ Top 1 Match: 197/287 ( 68.6% ) Opponents: 135/286 ( 47.2% )
{ Top 2 Match: 252/287 ( 87.8% ) Opponents: 188/286 ( 65.7% )
{ Top 3 Match: 265/287 ( 92.3% ) Opponents: 218/286 ( 76.2% )
{ Top 4 Match: 272/287 ( 94.8% ) Opponents: 242/286 ( 84.6% )
Originally posted by ZygalskiMaybe his opponents have not been practicing to beat Houdini & Rybka 10-0.
http://ratings.fide.com/view_games.phtml?id=2903741&name=%22Ivanov__Borislav(BUL
I've analysed games which were played most recently prior to Zadar 19th.
I wanted a medium sized batch, so I chose the first 13 games which all have 20 or more non-database moves. A couple of games were excluded because they're too short.
Pre-Zadar 19th:
Houdini 1.5a x6 ...[text shortened]... ) Opponents: 218/286 ( 76.2% )
{ Top 4 Match: 272/287 ( 94.8% ) Opponents: 242/286 ( 84.6% )