Spacious_Mind wrote:[Hi Rolf,
Have you researched this at all.. or are you just making opinions again... No one told anyone anything..
I know at least that I dont want to come in a similar situation like the one in the thread where you asked in your very first message if Rybka would cheat. I made a general message and was not meaning you in particular when I wrote the general you. Excuse me this is also a question of time. We have already folks who protest because they feel overdemanded. More than the above is not necessary from my side. Politeness will certainly be no obstacle for potential further contacts. BTW now I must cure my diarrhoe and take my pills, tons of pills as you know. <cough>
But if it interests you, yes I have myself researched the topic and got interesting results but it didnt go into a final dissertation. That's life.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
Spacious_Mind wrote:[Hi Rolf,
Have you researched this at all.. or are you just making opinions again... No one told anyone anything..
I know at least that I dont want to come in a similar situation like the one in the thread where you asked in your very first message if Rybka would cheat. I made a general message and was not meaning you in particular when I wrote the general you. Excuse me this is also a question of time. We have already folks who protest because they feel overdemanded. More than the above is not necessary from my side. Politeness will certainly be no obstacle for potential further contacts. BTW now I must cure my diarrhoe and take my pills, tons of pills as you know. <cough>
But if it interests you, yes I have myself researched the topic and got interesting results but it didnt go into a final dissertation. That's life.
Hi Rolf,
My appologies, I did not mean to sound harsh. I in fact enjoy your many different views on things... I have absolutely no complaints... but I hope you also don't mind being questioned on occasion
Spacious_Mind wrote:
There is no consideration for a8 at all it is rejected the moment you see the position.
Nick
If Ra8+ is rejected then it is considered by definition(not for a long time but even using 0.1 second for calculating line is enough to claim that it is considered)
Moves that are not considered are moves that humans simply ignore them.
Spacious_Mind wrote:
There is no consideration for a8 at all it is rejected the moment you see the position.
Nick
If Ra8+ is rejected then it is considered by definition(not for a long time but even using 0.1 second for calculating line is enough to claim that it is considered)
Moves that are not considered are moves that humans simply ignore them.
Uri
Hi Uri,
I am not neccessarily disagreeing with you. But your example is less then 2 ply deep. There is nothing further to consider on that move. It is instantly rejected. The same as the rest of your position, the experienced human does not calculate immediately. He looks at it and knows immediately that he has to stop the pawn. His mind starts working on that. So he will keep his King close to the pawn and have his bishop in a position to intercept the pawn and take it...game over.. Nothing in that position requires much plys.. 1 ply (glances at the board) would be enough to draw the game.
Spacious_Mind wrote:
My appologies, I did not mean to sound harsh. I in fact enjoy your many different views on things... I have absolutely no complaints... but I hope you also don't mind being questioned on occasion
All the best
Nick
Just apologize to Vas. Again, I dont want to go through such an experience again like the one in the other thread from you. Otherwise I have never rejected any question. Perhaps we come now slowly out of the diffamation stage into normal talks with questions back and through. That would be fun. But I doubt that others than Bob have the necessary intelligence to understand what a foreigner meant.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
Spacious_Mind wrote:
My appologies, I did not mean to sound harsh. I in fact enjoy your many different views on things... I have absolutely no complaints... but I hope you also don't mind being questioned on occasion
All the best
Nick
Just apologize to Vas. Again, I dont want to go through such an experience again like the one in the other thread from you. Otherwise I have never rejected any question. Perhaps we come now slowly out of the diffamation stage into normal talks with questions back and through. That would be fun. But I doubt that others than Bob have the necessary intelligence to understand what a foreigner meant.
Hi Rolf,
I hope your pill also cures your fixations I have nothing to appologize to Vas.. he should be appologizing to me. I have spend hours appologizing to me for being so stupid as trying to understand why his engines don't play correctly with ply settings. He sells his products through Chessbase yet he cannot even use the options available in chessbase correctly. Why does he need to add 3 plies to his ply settings.. I would consider that under some circumstances as cheating. So it is me who awaits an appology for wasting a lot of my time before I finally found out from someone here in the Forum that you have to deduct 3 ply's on everything that Vas says.
Spacious_Mind wrote:
There is no consideration for a8 at all it is rejected the moment you see the position.
Nick
If Ra8+ is rejected then it is considered by definition(not for a long time but even using 0.1 second for calculating line is enough to claim that it is considered)
Moves that are not considered are moves that humans simply ignore them.
Uri
Hi Uri,
I am not neccessarily disagreeing with you. But your example is less then 2 ply deep. There is nothing further to consider on that move. It is instantly rejected. The same as the rest of your position, the experienced human does not calculate immediately. He looks at it and knows immediately that he has to stop the pawn. His mind starts working on that. So he will keep his King close to the pawn and have his bishop in a position to intercept the pawn and take it...game over.. Nothing in that position requires much plys.. 1 ply (glances at the board) would be enough to draw the game.
best regards
Nick
I agree that you do not need to calculate much in the diagram that I gave.
My point is not about the specific diagram but about the number of positions that humans search usually in chess(not in simple endgames)
I believe that they may consider moves that they do not claim that they consider and it was my point and if practically they give 35 positions when they write their thoughts then it does not mean that they do not consider more positions.
Spacious_Mind wrote:
There is no consideration for a8 at all it is rejected the moment you see the position.
Nick
If Ra8+ is rejected then it is considered by definition(not for a long time but even using 0.1 second for calculating line is enough to claim that it is considered)
Moves that are not considered are moves that humans simply ignore them.
Uri
Hi Uri,
I am not neccessarily disagreeing with you. But your example is less then 2 ply deep. There is nothing further to consider on that move. It is instantly rejected. The same as the rest of your position, the experienced human does not calculate immediately. He looks at it and knows immediately that he has to stop the pawn. His mind starts working on that. So he will keep his King close to the pawn and have his bishop in a position to intercept the pawn and take it...game over.. Nothing in that position requires much plys.. 1 ply (glances at the board) would be enough to draw the game.
best regards
Nick
I agree that you do not need to calculate much in the diagram that I gave.
My point is not about the specific diagram but about the number of positions that humans search usually in chess(not in simple endgames)
I believe that they may consider moves that they do not claim that they consider and it was my point and if practically they give 35 positions when they write their thoughts then it does not mean that they do not consider more positions.
Uri
I agree Uri, remember the quote said on average. So it could be 10 in some positons and 100 in others.
Spacious_Mind wrote:
My appologies, I did not mean to sound harsh. I in fact enjoy your many different views on things... I have absolutely no complaints... but I hope you also don't mind being questioned on occasion
All the best
Nick
Just apologize to Vas. Again, I dont want to go through such an experience again like the one in the other thread from you. Otherwise I have never rejected any question. Perhaps we come now slowly out of the diffamation stage into normal talks with questions back and through. That would be fun. But I doubt that others than Bob have the necessary intelligence to understand what a foreigner meant.
Well,if the foreigner is a nutcase,he will be misunderstood by so many people....I am talking in general of course,no offence is intended
Dr.D
_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….
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Well,if the foreigner is a nutcase,he will be misunderstood by so many people....I am talking in general of course,no offence is intended
Dr.D
How could someone be a nutcase if Bob understands his questions? Check. I think it's also Mate.
-Popper and Lakatos are good but I'm stuck on Leibowitz
