zullil wrote:Even if you made each of your moves without computer assistance, there is the question of whether the engine's moves were actually made by the engine, and without the use of settings or modifications that might have weakened the engine.
Yes I analyzed the games and the engines really made the same positional mistakes so I have good reason to believe that his victories over these engines were really honest.
What I think this again proves that humans really are superior and much smarter than chess engines in their strategical understanding of the game. And chess engines really do not understand chess strategy.
Possible, I suppose. But the probability seems vanishingly small, especially at game-in-five-minutes.
I'd like to look at the moves supposedly made by an engine and see if those moves are reproducible by the engine.
zullil wrote:Even if you made each of your moves without computer assistance, there is the question of whether the engine's moves were actually made by the engine, and without the use of settings or modifications that might have weakened the engine.
Yes I analyzed the games and the engines really made the same positional mistakes so I have good reason to believe that his victories over these engines were really honest.
What I think this again proves that humans really are superior and much smarter than chess engines in their strategical understanding of the game. And chess engines really do not understand chess strategy.
Possible, I suppose. But the probability seems vanishingly small, especially at game-in-five-minutes.
I'd like to look at the moves supposedly made by an engine and see if those moves are reproducible by the engine.
Again +1....
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
zullil wrote:Even if you made each of your moves without computer assistance, there is the question of whether the engine's moves were actually made by the engine, and without the use of settings or modifications that might have weakened the engine.
Yes I analyzed the games and the engines really made the same positional mistakes so I have good reason to believe that his victories over these engines were really honest.
What I think this again proves that humans really are superior and much smarter than chess engines in their strategical understanding of the game. And chess engines really do not understand chess strategy.
Possible, I suppose. But the probability seems vanishingly small, especially at game-in-five-minutes.
I'd like to look at the moves supposedly made by an engine and see if those moves are reproducible by the engine.
styx wrote:it's hard for me to believe, that you are able to defeat (or even draw) a 5 minutes game against a top engine - even with anti-engine-preparation. i'm really sorry about that. i want to believe it, but it's simply so unlikely. i would still be suspicious if you are a 2500+ elo player.
i've seen several postings of some games, where someone claimed to beat houdini. i'm still waiting for an official event where someone can replicate it without taking back a move.
i know that even the best engines sometimes can't find the right move in time, but even the ones they find are usually not the kind of moves, that lead to instant losses.
I believe that you cherry-picked a few games that you won and left out the hundreds (if not thousands) that you lost. Also there is no proof that you didn't take back any moves either.
To be taken seriously, you unfortunately have to do something like go on Playchess and play an engine online at 3 0 or 5 0. Beating an engine at home where you might have the luxury of taking back moves or even have the engine analysis window open needs to be eliminated as a possibility. The reason for all the doubt is nothing personal, but very well known players such as Carlsen, Kramnik and Nakamura ... as well as countless other super strong chess professionals, can't do what you seem to be able to do so easily.
M ANSARI wrote:The reason for all the doubt is nothing personal, but very well known players such as Carlsen, Kramnik and Nakamura ... as well as countless other super strong chess professionals, can't do what you seem to be able to do so easily.
I'm sure that Nakamura could find a weakness or a limit in the program to get a win.
For example, I found out that the best chess engines still do not quite understand the king safety factor very well and often tend to underestimate attack on the king and I'm sure that Nakamura, being very experienced against chess engines, could exploit this weakness against the program and get a winning position.
For sure, I lost most of games...it is clear but why to post games which engine won? There are no take backs. I will give one more example...it is 15 min. game (played on smartphone) and you can check it. There are so many human moves that any engine would never make...just see the game...
