Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 83
  1. #61
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    More nonsense. There are people who are obsessed with chess and play it all the time who are weak players. One of our posters here is always telling us about them!
    Those are people who are unwillingly pushing thousands of bullet wood games, I am willingly
    mostly analysing games and positions at much slower pace(apart from the games I play, much less).

  2. #62
    CC International Master
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,793
    Grandmaster, FIDE Trainer, 2018-19 Australian Champion

    Do you love your chess as much as I do?

    What is your chess dream?

    Are you willing to do what it takes?

    Everyone who is an expert at something now...learned from another expert.

    Share your chess journey with me illingworthchess@gmail.com and Ill give you my 7-Page Basic Chess Training Plan, to direct your chess training and improvement.

  3. #63
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    I am so happy, I just read a review on this book on Rybka forum by MarshallArts:

    The exhortation not to buy his books is very mean-spirited and basically unfounded. I can understand if someone does not like
    the playing conditions which these games were conducted under, but the criticism is going too far.

    His books are quite good actually. I only skimmed through the Secret of Chess, but the newer human vs machine game books seem
    packed with good and crisp explanations that can help elevate a reader's play even against other human players. The games themselves
    are H vs M masterpieces, regardless of whatever handicaps were used by the author. A very high level understanding of chess transpires
    when looking at these well commented games. I was positively surprised by the quality of these games and their annotations.


    http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaf...w.pl?tid=32312

  4. #64
    CC Rookie
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    10
    This book failed:

    http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic...iew=&start=100

    Apparently, chess programmers (not just me!) don't believe Lyudmil Tsvetkov. If chess programmers don't buy the book, I don't see why the general public would like it.

    3 months on, I have to ascertain there is not much feedback/interest in my book. I see 3 possible causes for this:

    1.) The book is bad
    2.) People can't understand it
    3.) The book is written in high style/high knowledge style, different from traditional conceptions, and most people prefer low knowledge/routine instead of high knowledge
    I think it's (1) and (4) - the book is full of unproven claims.
    Last edited by studentt; 17-11-2017 at 07:20 AM.

  5. #65
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Part III is out: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B077PN5QT8...1501584&sr=1-8

    This will be the last part of the series, for the time being.

    I would not like that this turns into a boring book,
    the purpose has never been to publish as many games as possible,
    but just to demonstrate the possibility to win against the top engines,
    and cover the most common winning options.

    I can play more games in the future, so there might be 4th part, but this will be only in a couple of years, when much stronger engines appear.
    It does not make sense to repeat one and the same stuff. When much stronger engines appear, and people say again, well, it might have been
    possible to beat the tops couple of years ago, that crazy guy Lyudmil used to do it, but not now anymore, then I will play some games to
    renew my collection.

    I would like to thank all those on this forum, who, by chance or willingly, have bought different of my books. Thanks a lot! You have helped me to at least keep part of my face and hope in what I am doing.

    The third part features handicap wins. All the credit goes to Larry Kaufman(thanks, Larry, for all those Komodo handicap matches), as, whenever Komodo would play a match against some human, I would try my hand with
    precisely the same imbalance against the tops.
    It proved that handicap games are a great fun, one of the most interesting things in chess, and also are very helpful to your tactical training, for the reason that materially imbalanced positions increase the necessity for more calculations.

    I would also like to thank the mods here for their patience and understanding.

  6. #66
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by studentt View Post
    This book failed:

    http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic...iew=&start=100

    Apparently, chess programmers (not just me!) don't believe Lyudmil Tsvetkov. If chess programmers don't buy the book, I don't see why the general public would like it.



    I think it's (1) and (4) - the book is full of unproven claims.
    Actually, it is 2 and 3, there is not the slightest doubt about that.
    Your 4 1-star reviews might have plunged my books sales, but Amazon deleted your last one,
    I hope they will take further measures too.

    If you are a student, don't be that agressive and try to learn something instead.

    Btw., as said, I know who you are on talkchess, don't make me disclose this very painful truth for you.

  7. #67
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    12,770
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post

    Btw., as said, I know who you are on talkchess, don't make me disclose this very painful truth for you.
    I also think your claims based on pre-cooked games are rubbish. However, do feel free to disclose that Michael Baron's real name is..Michael Baron
    Interested in Chess Lessons?
    Email webbaron!@gmail.com for more Info!

  8. #68
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by MichaelBaron View Post
    I also think your claims based on pre-cooked games are rubbish. However, do feel free to disclose that Michael Baron's real name is..Michael Baron
    That is a very very different thing.
    You have the full right to your opinion(especially when you are able to support it, which you are not).
    That guy, guy, however, posted 4(!) 1-star reviews for all my books in the matter of hours, claiming that:
    - there are spelling mistakes everywhere, when Amazon software shows none
    - illegal positions everywhere, when there are none, etc.

    And he gets some helpful votes, you know, people have not read the book, after all.

    Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but should not lie, especially 4 times in a row.

    There is something more, your real name and user name match, while his are different.

    And lastly, yesterday I had been browsing the games of the Deep Blue - Kasparov match, and, guess what:
    I was astounded to realise how much superior the games presented in my books are, chess evolves after all, both at the human
    and engine level.

    If I had to be fully objective, it is me who deserves all the hype surrounding Kasparov's recent book
    'Deep thinking', for 'Human versus Machine', but nevermind.

    Later

  9. #69
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    One thing I forgot to mention is games in all 3 parts have been played with ponder=on, so this somewhat decreases the time difference, but I guess, especially for closed positions, the effect would be rather small, as engines would be pondering mostly the wrong moves.

    I have always wondered what the effect of ponder on game play is, I presume rather insignificant.

  10. #70
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    I will post this here, as it has some relevance to computer chess and human-engine competition.

    After doing an extensive study of the Fischer game collection, with the help of Stockfish, I just published a book on the theme:
    https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0...a&pf_rd_i=4406

    While going through the positional test suite, including 112 test positions, I had to ascertain that Stockfish still fails to solve around one third, but maybe even close to half of the puzzles. With the tactical set, Stockfish has no problems at all, all solved.

    Make the conclusions yourselves how weak actually Stockfish is and how strong Fischer.

    So, you might just want to forget anything about alleged engine superiority in chess.

  11. #71
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Here one puzzle from the positional suite:

    r4rk1/4bppp/pqbp1n2/1p2pPB1/4P3/1BNQ4/PPP3PP/R4R1K w - - 0 15

    (I can't find the fen option here to put a diagram, sorry, if someone could give me a hint how to do it)

    The point is to find 15. Bf6!(which SF finds, or maybe first a4 b4, which does not change the overall character of the position and assessment) Bf6, and then 16. Bd5!, which is the real key move, and which SF fails to see. It prefers 16. Nd5? instead, which after 16...Bd5 17. Bd5 should only lead to a draw in an ending with opposite colour bishops.

    Any engine seeing that sequence?
    Or any human, for that matter?

  12. #72
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,725
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    Here one puzzle from the positional suite:

    r4rk1/4bppp/pqbp1n2/1p2pPB1/4P3/1BNQ4/PPP3PP/R4R1K w - - 0 15

    (I can't find the fen option here to put a diagram, sorry, if someone could give me a hint how to do it)
    For FEN without moves just put {fen} at the start of the FEN string and {/fen} at the end, but use square brackets instead of curly.

    FEN Viewer


    Click quote to see how I've done it.

    For FEN with moves use {pgn=(fen string)}insert moves here{/pgn} but again with square brackets instead of curly. That one is tricky to get right.

  13. #73
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,484
    Quote Originally Posted by LyudmilTsvetkov View Post
    Here one puzzle from the positional suite:

    r4rk1/4bppp/pqbp1n2/1p2pPB1/4P3/1BNQ4/PPP3PP/R4R1K w - - 0 15

    (I can't find the fen option here to put a diagram, sorry, if someone could give me a hint how to do it)

    The point is to find 15. Bf6!(which SF finds, or maybe first a4 b4, which does not change the overall character of the position and assessment) Bf6, and then 16. Bd5!, which is the real key move, and which SF fails to see. It prefers 16. Nd5? instead, which after 16...Bd5 17. Bd5 should only lead to a draw in an ending with opposite colour bishops.

    Any engine seeing that sequence?
    Or any human, for that matter?
    Um yeah Bxf6 and Bd5 followed by basking in the glory of my knight was my first thought, I'm not very good though.
    meep meep

  14. #74
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,725
    One question here is how does one establish that the positional move chosen by Fischer was actually the best move in the position? Here is the original game:

    PGN Viewer
     

    From move 17 onwards, almost every black move is dubious or bad so the game proves nothing about the strength of the plan. Is it so easy for white to win after 17...Qxc6 which makes it harder for white to quickly occupy d5?

    Also, the superiority of engines isn't that they are always positionally brilliant. It's that they don't make short-range tactical errors.

  15. #75
    CC Candidate Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    77
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    For FEN without moves just put {fen} at the start of the FEN string and {/fen} at the end, but use square brackets instead of curly.

    FEN Viewer


    Click quote to see how I've done it.

    For FEN with moves use {pgn=(fen string)}insert moves here{/pgn} but again with square brackets instead of curly. That one is tricky to get right.
    Thanks Kevin.

    For the fen, I am sure I will do it next time, but can you please explain a bit more about posting pgns/full games?
    How do I post a full game?

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
  •