Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 78
  1. #1
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63

    Human versus Machine

    Anyone interested in human-computer matches might check my new book:
    https://www.amazon.com/dp/1549916785...e%3A1250226011 (paperback)

    https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0768G8R2C...e%3A1250226011 (ebook)

    also available on amazon.uk(search by author and title), amazon.de, etc.

    Amply commented and diagrammed games.

    Seems like the first book with extensive coverage of a large number of winning games against the top engines.

    Kasparov, Carlsen and Nakamura still have not written one.

  2. #2
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    How I miss my August visit here, when it was much noisier.
    I even miss Mychael Baron's quips.

    One thing I wonder is why routine books like for example a book treating the Budapest Gambit in the most usual of ways, a book entitled
    something like 'Tactics in the Budapest Gambit', or 'Winning Tactics in the Budapest Gambit', that actually just takes ready-made samples
    out of some game database, filters the games, and then shows some very obvious tactical solutions, shallow at that, would get much more
    attention than a book treating a completely new, original and unsurveyed subject, like the way a human can beat the top engines?

    After all, the book about the Budapest(which, btw., might be altogether lost with perfect play) is extremely routine and unoriginal, one could change it
    for any good database, while the other book treats topics that have not been treated before.

    Why would anyone prefer the first book, any guess?

    Has the modern world become so zombied into following routine and repetitiveness, that it would not like anything new?

    In the past, people used to cherish new and unchartered waters, but not any more?

    In the past, writers who offered something new were highly respected and sought after, but not now?

  3. #3
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Comparing 'The Secret of Chess' and 'Human versus Machine: How to beat Stockfish and Komodo',
    I wrote the latter much quicker, the former took whole 4 months, but the interesting thing is
    how notions presented in 'The Secret of Chess' are visible in the games showcased in 'Human versus Machine'.

    For example, the games exhibit patterns and notions like:

    - twice backward shelter pawn on f7
    - pointed chains
    - white and black KID structures
    - fully closed sides of the board, etc., etc.

    all of which could be found in 'The Secret of Chess'.

    Of course, it is actually the other way round: the many thousands of games(over 50 000, to be clear)
    I have played against engines and top engines and the knowledge I derived from them are reflected
    in the knowledge presented on the pages of 'The Secret of Chess'.

    That is how I verified that knowledge: by playing an infinite number of games against the very top,
    and it seems to work.

    If anyone would like to consider the games in 'Human versus Machine' as fake ones, well,
    you simply don't have a point, looking at the specific positions, you will not find even a single one
    that even distantly resembles any human or engine game you could find in any database.

    There are simply no such games and positions, so who came up with the concept and system?
    Also, checking evaluations, you will easily see the games are for real. Current Stockfish development version
    still does not understand most of them.

    Again, why would beating Stockfish and Komodo be less interesting than reproducing a routine game from a
    public database?

  4. #4
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    10
    Please don't buy the book.

    Lyudmil Tsvetkov is a very well known chess troll on talkchess.com. This retired man dream beating Stockfish/Komodo everyday, and he thinks he's the best player in the world despite never played a single rated game for the last 10 years. In reality, Lyudmil is about FIDE 1900 strength.

    In Computer Chess, there're two very well known trolls - ARB and Lyudmil Tsvetkov. ARB is a video creator on how he beats Stockfish, Komodo and Houdini (he posted in Computer Chess section). Tsvetkov is similar, he speaks much more politely but he'd like to troll about his computer chess "understanding". Tsvetkov isn't a programmer, he doesn't know how to compile Stockfish, he doesn't even undertsand alpha-beta pruning.

    If there was a world-chess trolling ranking, both of them would have been well over ELO 3000+.

    Please don't buy the book. Don't waste of your time and money.

    Example how he spammed talkchess.com: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic...723335&t=64615
    Last edited by studentt; 10-10-2017 at 01:39 PM.

  5. #5
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    9,656
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    How I miss my August visit here, when it was much noisier.
    I even miss Mychael Baron's quips.
    ?
    I think by now, it has become transparent that you are simply delusional...so there is little point in commenting on your posts.
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  6. #6
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    10
    @LyudmilTsvetkov

    We'd had heated discussion on talkchess.com, but let me repeat once more. Forget about your "superiority" in computer chess. You're not an authority in chess - human chess or computer chess. You know nothing about computer chess. You're just an ordinary retired old man who likes chess.

    You're not a strong chess player, in fact you can't even beat me. Forget about beating Stockfish/Komodo/Houdini.

    What you need is a doctor. Stockfish/Komodo can't help you, your "FIDE 3000+" rating can't help you, your "100-0" clean record against the best computer engines can't help you. Please find a doctor near you.
    Last edited by studentt; 10-10-2017 at 03:17 PM.

  7. #7
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    10
    > http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=65397

    Dr Milos Stanisavljevic, who is a renowned chess engine programmer, called the book "Science Fiction & Fantasy".

  8. #8
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    10
    > http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaf...w.pl?tid=32312

    This old man wrote: "Kasparov is weak, man, learn from people who can beat Stockfish. "

  9. #9
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Well, I don't know who you are on talkchess, maybe you can present yourself,
    but chessprogramming wiki and Amazon say otherwise:

    https://chessprogramming.wikispaces....udmil+Tsvetkov

    https://www.amazon.com/Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/e/B074W689PN

    Concerning my elo, in 2004 it was over 2100, my Bulgarian rating over 2200:
    https://www.365chess.com/players/Ludmil_Tsvetkov (scroll down the page)

    This is in 2004, so 13 years from now.

    I have been candidate master for 20 years!

    You can also check different Stockfish forum threads about my contributions to Stockfish, they are so many,
    that I will not make a link, just check.

    That was my rating when I was busy with a full-time job and have been playing very few
    competitive games only on weekends.

    For the past 5 years, I have been doing only chess, 24/7, so guess how much stronger am I now.

    And also, read the book, to learn how the best human players in the world play against the best engines.

  10. #10
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    still, you commented.

  11. #11
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by studentt View Post
    @LyudmilTsvetkov

    We'd had heated discussion on talkchess.com, but let me repeat once more. Forget about your "superiority" in computer chess. You're not an authority in chess - human chess or computer chess. You know nothing about computer chess. You're just an ordinary retired old man who likes chess.

    You're not a strong chess player, in fact you can't even beat me. Forget about beating Stockfish/Komodo/Houdini.

    What you need is a doctor. Stockfish/Komodo can't help you, your "FIDE 3000+" rating can't help you, your "100-0" clean record against the best computer engines can't help you. Please find a doctor near you.
    I will just repost what I already posted:

    Well, I don't know who you are on talkchess, maybe you can present yourself,
    but chessprogramming wiki and Amazon say otherwise:

    https://chessprogramming.wikispaces....udmil+Tsvetkov

    https://www.amazon.com/Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/e/B074W689PN

    Concerning my elo, in 2004 it was over 2100, my Bulgarian rating over 2200:
    https://www.365chess.com/players/Ludmil_Tsvetkov (scroll down the page)

    This is in 2004, so 13 years from now.

    I have been candidate master for 20 years!

    You can also check different Stockfish forum threads about my contributions to Stockfish, they are so many,
    that I will not make a link, just check.

    That was my rating when I was busy with a full-time job and have been playing very few
    competitive games only on weekends.

    For the past 5 years, I have been doing only chess, 24/7, so guess how much stronger am I now.

    And also, read the book, to learn how the best human players in the world play against the best engines.

  12. #12
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by studentt View Post
    > http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=65397

    Dr Milos Stanisavljevic, who is a renowned chess engine programmer, called the book "Science Fiction & Fantasy".
    You even did not understand the humour side of it.
    He was referring to Amazon book categories, where there are options for your book
    to be listed under a category reading like

    - non-fiction -> hobby and games-> board games -> chess

    but also another one like

    - fiction -> fantasy

    And it is suited for such a listing, of course, if you have a bit of a sense of humour, as beating the top engines
    might be considered fantasy.

    btw., fantasy sells much more than chess.

    I am not certain Milos is a renowned chess programmer, maybe a renowned statistician, but a renowned programmer?
    btw., I hold a PhD too, in political science.

    as said, unfortunately, you are just a student, of the bad ones.

  13. #13
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by studentt View Post
    > http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaf...w.pl?tid=32312

    This old man wrote: "Kasparov is weak, man, learn from people who can beat Stockfish. "
    and that is indeed true, the games in my latest book show it clearly.

    btw., here the link to the kindle edition on Amazon Australia, just for your convenience:
    https://www.amazon.com.au/Human-Vers...versus+machine

  14. #14
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    35,922
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    For the past 5 years, I have been doing only chess, 24/7, so guess how much stronger am I now.
    It would be better if we didn't have to guess because you had demonstrated your strength under controlled conditions, either against humans or against computers.

    Since you say you are doing chess full time, obviously you have time to play in tournaments if you want to. Or you could play a match against an engine under controlled supervised conditions and show that you can beat engines.

    On this forum we have the following rule:

    * Impersonation of other users or of Australian chess personalities generally, including via PM, is not permitted. Multiple accounts for a single poster may be permitted, or not, at our discretion. We will frequently ban anonymous accounts that are suspected of being operated by banned users, any account that misrepresents the nature of the person operating it (eg adult posters pretending to be juniors) and any account employing a proxy IP.

    (my bolding for emphasis)

    My concern is that you may be misrepresenting yourself as a stronger player than you are, and that this is concerning if you are doing so while trying to use this forum to sell products. If you do have a PhD in political science you would surely be aware of the idea that empirical claims should be testable against evidence.

    If you believe your current playing strength is much higher than your rating then please present reliable evidence of this of a sort that we don't have to pay for.

    (Dr) Kevin Bonham
    admin/moderator, chesschat.org
    Last edited by Kevin Bonham; 11-10-2017 at 05:20 PM.

  15. #15
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    63
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    It would be better if we didn't have to guess because you had demonstrated your strength under controlled conditions, either against humans or against computers.

    Since you say you are doing chess full time, obviously you have time to play in tournaments if you want to. Or you could play a match against an engine under controlled supervised conditions and show that you can beat engines.

    On this forum we have the following rule:

    * Impersonation of other users or of Australian chess personalities generally, including via PM, is not permitted. Multiple accounts for a single poster may be permitted, or not, at our discretion. We will frequently ban anonymous accounts that are suspected of being operated by banned users, any account that misrepresents the nature of the person operating it (eg adult posters pretending to be juniors) and any account employing a proxy IP.

    (my bolding for emphasis)

    My concern is that you may be misrepresenting yourself as a stronger player than you are, and that this is concerning if you are doing so while trying to use this forum to sell products. If you do have a PhD in political science you would surely be aware of the idea that empirical claims should be testable against evidence.

    If you believe your current playing strength is much higher than your rating then please present reliable evidence of this of a sort that we don't have to pay for.

    (Dr) Kevin Bonham
    admin/moderator, chesschat.org
    Dear Mr. Bonham,

    so, in what kind am I misrepresenting myself?

    I posted different links from where it is clear who I am, how could this possibly be a misrepresentation?

    Please, don't get excited about me trying to sell Australians my (fake?) products. So far, for more than 2 months,
    I don't have a single buyer from Australia, so the chastity of the Australian customer is more or less safeguarded.

    I don't want to sell anything to you, actually, it is the other way round: my books are much worthier than the ads time
    and wording I have been spending on them.

    Also, the last 5 years I did not get paid by anyone, I contributed an awful lot on talkchess: without my messages there,
    Stockfish would never have been of its current strength, but also some of the commercial engines.

    So you probably understand how unpleasant it is when you contribute something, and instead get scolded.

    Concerning what I have done and what I have not done in the past, and how much I misrepresent myself,
    please ask top engine authors about their opinion on me: ask Marco Costalba, ask Mark Lefler.

    And now I quote Mark Lefler, the author of Komodo 1 to 1, upon getting a copy of the Secret of Chess:
    'Great book! In the first 30 pages I skimmed, I found 10 ideas to try implementing in Komodo. Great stuff.'

    Whatever.

    I am not dependent on this forum for publicity of any kind, so am not too much excited.

    I don't like the tone, though, I would have preferred a much more substantial discussion,
    for example, in what way it would be possible to overwhelm top engines, concrete strategies,
    move sequences in the opening, etc.

    This would make the thread a real thread.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Man vs Machine
    By Alexrules01 in forum General Chess Chat
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-02-2011, 09:01 PM
  2. Axiom v Sigma Chess 6.1 [Possum vs Machine]
    By Basil in forum Correspondence Matches
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 13-03-2007, 09:09 PM
  3. Man versus Machine: the Ultimate showdown
    By qpawn in forum Correspondence Matches
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-08-2006, 02:04 PM
  4. Australia versus Scotland
    By Davidflude in forum Correspondence Chess News
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 17-11-2005, 04:05 PM
  5. Men v Machine match in Indonesia
    By News Bot in forum Chess Australia
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-01-2005, 04:01 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •