Originally posted by usmc7257 If it seems like I am picking on you, you will have to understand where I am coming from. I think the way you parade around the forums spreading your ignorant drivel and calling people liars without cause is ridiculous, especially when you are not being truthful yourself.
Proper Knob said this on another thread recently. It's a good idea:
Zero interest in what an engine user has to say [RJHinds]. Suffice to say, every new game you start i'll be sending your opponent the data that has been collected and letting them know the situation.
Originally posted by RJHinds Yes, I read only "Huckleberry Finn" and I remember he got all worked up
over the Bible stories until he found out the people were dead. He did not
take much stock in dead people.
I also thought Huckleberry Finn was a wonderful book, I especially liked the detailing of
the colloquial Negro dialect. I read somewhere that there were attempts to sanitise it
by removing some references, which would be a real pity.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie I also thought Huckleberry Finn was a wonderful book, I especially liked the detailing of
the colloquial Negro dialect. I read somewhere that there were attempts to sanitise it
by removing some references, which would be a real pity.
some of his better work is not as well known.
-what is man? and other essays
-the mysterious stranger.
he didn't finish the second one, but it's still good.
Originally posted by FMF Proper Knob said this on another thread recently. It's a good idea:
[b]Zero interest in what an engine user has to say [RJHinds]. Suffice to say, every new game you start i'll be sending your opponent the data that has been collected and letting them know the situation.[/b]
What I find absolutely astonishing is that he sees all of the data, and plays dumb about it. How do you have match up rates better than ANY world champion, and act like it is no big deal? He has the audacity to preach honesty and kindness in the forums, and then do the exact opposite while playing chess here. I wonder if Twain ever said anything about hypocrisy?
Originally posted by usmc7257 What I find absolutely astonishing is that he sees all of the data, and plays dumb about it. How do you have match up rates better than ANY world champion, and act like it is no big deal? He has the audacity to preach honesty and kindness in the forums, and then do the exact opposite while playing chess here. I wonder if Twain ever said anything about hypocrisy?
To me, it is like the data that is said to prove evolution. It doesn't
prove anything to me.
Originally posted by FMF Proper Knob said this on another thread recently. It's a good idea:
[b]Zero interest in what an engine user has to say [RJHinds]. Suffice to say, every new game you start i'll be sending your opponent the data that has been collected and letting them know the situation.[/b]
That is just fine. I hope they delete the games if they have any doubt and
refuse to play me. If they are still too late, I will accept a draw offer if
the game has not gone past the 9th move. Okay?
World Champions do not have three days to think on each move and
can not move the pieces around on the board while they are deciding
what that one move will be. So it is apples and oranges. 😏
Originally posted by RJHinds That is just fine. I hope they delete the games if they have any doubt and
refuse to play me. If they are still too late, I will accept a draw offer if
the game has not gone past the 9th move. Okay?
Perhaps Proper Knob should take the data that have been collected, and - without any comment, as the numbers speak for themselves - send them to all your opponents since you joined the site so that they know the situation.
Originally posted by RJHinds World Champions do not have three days to think on each move and
can not move the pieces around on the board while they are deciding
what that one move will be. So it is apples and oranges. 😏
What about ICCF World Champions?
How do you think they match up?
Originally posted by VoidSpirit some of his better work is not as well known.
-what is man? and other essays
-the mysterious stranger.
he didn't finish the second one, but it's still good.
We even built a raft and sailed it down one of our local rivers (more a little stream) in
imitation of Huck Finn, we even found and explored some islands, was awesome. Ill try
to check out some of these others, Robert Louis Stevenson also has some great
essays, Virginibus Puerisque is a collection of these and there is a great essay on the
virtues of being idle.
Originally posted by RJHinds World Champions do not have three days to think on each move and
can not move the pieces around on the board while they are deciding
what that one move will be. So it is apples and oranges. 😏
It's not apples and oranges, analysis of correspondence chess world championship matches (pre chess engines) still fall below the engine match-up thresholds.
The simple fact you don't recognise is that humans do not play like machines as former mod Gatecrasher put quite eloquently in a post a while back -
Strong humans and computers play differently. Strong humans generally play to specific strategies, to a specific plan, whereas engines will quite happily go off on tangents for a 0.01 pawn advantage, after evaluating millions of positions in a matter of seconds. These are moves and evaluations that strong human beings wouldn't even begin to consider, even if they were capable.
Simplistically, if you compare verifiably strong human match-up rates to engines over many games, the level of agreement with engines is far lower than many "top players" on RHP manage to consistently achieve.
While it is true that super-GMs get higher match-ups than regular GMs, who in turn get higher match-ups than IMs, who in turn get higher match-ups than FM's, etc, many players here and on other internet chess sites are capable of extraordinary match-ups; far, far, far in excess of the super-GM range. Even the top echelons of correspondence chess in the pre-computer era had similar match-up rates as today's regular GMs (and less than current super GMs)
There are some really good players at RHP whose match-up stats fall below GM/IM levels. These are the strong human players, who play excellent chess without the need to mimic Rybka or Fritz. And then there are those who, for want of a better word, are cheats.
Do numbers lie?
26 Jan '12 19:55
Back to Top