On Feb 7, 11:01 am, NOSPAM wrote:

jefkto show that chess is a draw (it is, btw).

Liar.

so if world chess champion Anand claims chess is
a draw, he is a liar ?
Sure chess can be a dynamic game sometimes,
whereby the comp evaluation gradually is changing,
but by playing rybka-rybka standard game, not only opening
theory is improved , but the better it gets, the more drawish
the game seems to become.

who cares about a mathematical proof; can you
eg prove the Newtonion law action = minus reaction ?
scientific progress consists of paradigm shifts..

By claiming that chess still could be solved in the sense that its
a win for white, people are defying centuries of chess theory
whereby it's known that long succesful combinations
usually only can be made after sufficient positional
advantage has been built up. saying that a move as eg.
1 f3 *could* be the winning move simply is ridiculous
and that black could also be winning is even more crazy

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out, loser.

easy to resort to name calling when your posting anonymously,
isnt it; haven't they told you sometimes you got bad manners ?
(an American i presume; but even worse, you probably
cannot play chess at all, judging from your posting)

Then don't make claims of a mathematical/logical
nature that you can't prove.

well i dont have to; i'm a physicist, and draw my
conclusions from empirical facts. i've played *many*
slow comp-comp blitz games on a fast comp, analyzed
in detail the resulting book/database, also played
and investigated full length standard comp-comp games
with novelties, at least for the most drawish book lines..

anyway, i might be back a few months later on the
more decent icdchess forum, instead of this usenet,
and hopefully with some examples, and/or more
arguments to support my empirical 'hunch' that chess is a
draw; until then, others (feel free to try) can of course try to
falsify this by finding winning lines for white
against any possible defence for black..

good luck..

PS according to 'philosopher' P.Feyerabend Galileo Galilei
has not really 'proven' that the earth is revolving around
the sun (well it does, doesn it; any mathematical solution
or hypothesis describing real world eg with Newtonian mechanics
should be a simple as possible; you always extend it later
with general relativity, but thats makes not much difference )
Also according to this 'philosopher' astrology and witchcraft
are just as valid thought systems as mainstream science.
well i wonder then how this bloke got his degree..

ok,
as i probably will get some reactions again, here's
an example with a drawish line, and a but not spectacular
little novelty, at move 23; the black 16th move
is more important, but i suspect only people
who understand a lot of chess are able to
see the siginificance of this, and then maybe
as well for the drawish nature of chess(*)

[Event "Test_long games"]
[Site "PC_JEFK"]
[Date "2008.02.08"]
[Round "10"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C92"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. a4 h6 13. Bc2 exd4 14. cxd4
Nb4 15.
Bb1 c5 16. d5 g6!? { in what usually is considered the mainline of the
Zaitsev
black plays Nd7?!, after which white is thought to have a slight
advantage
after 17Ra3!? (but after analyzing 17..g6 -a move often disregarded-
this is
not the case)} 17. Nf1 Bg7 18. axb5 axb5 19. Rxa8 Qxa8 20. Bf4 {in
conventional
opening theory for the Zaitsev this was considered an advantage for
white,
based on two (human) games Gruenfeld(2459) played in 1984, but his
opponents
then failed to see the response Qd8! better way to protect the pawn on
d6 then
Qa6?} Qd8! {in Vroom (2200)- Demyak (2205), 1/2-1/2 white played 21
Qd2 ,
but Ng3 seems better} 21. Ng3 {!N} h5 22. Re3 Nd7 23. Bxd6 Bxb2 24.
Rb3 Bg7 25.
Bxc5 Nxc5 26. Rxb4 Qa5 27. Qd2 Na6 28. Rb3 Qxd2 29. Nxd2 b4 30. Re3 h4
31. Ngf1
Nc5 32. Nb3 Na4 33. Bd3 Nc3 34. g4 Bh6 35. Rf3 Ba8 36. Nc5 Rc8 37. Nb3
Nxd5 38.
exd5 Bxd5 39. Ba6 Ra8 40. Rd3 Bxb3 41. Rxb3 Rxa6 42. Rxb4 {rook+knight
with 3
pawns on kingside, vs rook+bishop on kingside, an obvious draw.} f6
{
1/2-1/2 User Adjudication} 1/2-1/2

jef

PS of course i have many more examples against 1.e4 e5!
And of course i've also looked at eg. Scottish, Italian, etc.
For (ie against) 1.d4 i'll might give some example later on
the (obvious more mature) forum icdchess.com
No need to look at Sicilian or Petrov, as with the
Ruy Lopez, especially the Zaitsev,l black seems to be fine.

(*) PS2 some may say that a few examples doesnt mean
anything, but what i've found is that in the middle game, just
because of the 'exponential growth' of the nr of possible playable
positions, in case of white winning line, black always can
manage to find another option to avoid such a white win.
If you don't believe it, you might try it, but its a lot of work,
and unless you wouldnt like to re-write the complete
Yugoslavian ECO/Encyclopedia of chess openings
and wouldnt really recommend it.. (cheers)

jefkto show thatchessis a draw (it is, btw).

Liar.

so if worldchesschampion Anand claimschessis
a draw, he is a liar ?
Surechesscan be a dynamic game sometimes,
whereby the comp evaluation gradually is changing,
but by playing rybka-rybka standard *game, not only opening
theory is improved , but the better it gets, the more drawish
the game seems to become.

You are correct the Perfect game will be draw.

Say White first move.

A bad player will play a move Which looses its queen after 10 moves.
A little good player will play a move so that his pawn gets killed
after 10 moves.
A Beginner Level at GetClub will play So that a pwn is lost in 15
moves.
Master Level will play a bad move So that a pawn in lost after 30
Moves.

MATHEMATICAL PROOF BY INDUCTION

So as the Game players strength increases the loss after X moves
reduces. So by Induction as the strength of player playing Chess
increases the loss of piece - 0 and number of moves after which a
pawn is killed - INFINITE.

And we know because of 50 move rule a Chess game cannot exceed 4800
Moves. So we can conclude a Perfect player will always get Chess to
draw.

I think Master Level at GetClub will play much like perfect game.

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

On Feb 10, 7:47 am, Sanny wrote:


I think Master Level at GetClub will play much like perfect game.

well there's an important element that's not implemented yet,
i've seen that's important the 3 times draw-repitition rule.

after you've implemented that you could try to compare
the program with commercial programs, and let
it play faster at master level (a Russian program Ufim
in fact has been programmed to play slower at easy
/medium levels, ie wait a few more seconds before moving
to simulate longer 'thinking' of the computer opponent

Play Chess at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

well i tried to log-in but with difficulties; first
the email with your verification code was blocked
by the spam filter of my server, but with web mail i
managed to find it. Second, after filling in the verification
code i got a new page saying 'page not found'.
anyway, logging in another time solved that problem,
(PS the board appears a to be a bit small,
no not the analysis board, thats very big..)

the about chess=draw again:

MATHEMATICAL PROOF BY INDUCTION
So as the Game players strength increases the loss after X moves
reduces. So by Induction as the strength of player playing Chess
increases the loss of piece - 0 and number of moves after which a
pawn is killed - INFINITE.

And we know because of 50 move rule a Chess game cannot exceed 4800
Moves. So we can conclude a Perfect player will always get Chess to
draw.

well i'm not sure whether this 'proof' will be up to rigorous
mathematical
standards, probably not, as it's not socalled 'complete induction'
(Pascal) (if chess is draw for move N=1, assume chess is a draw at
move N (eg.59 or 3314..; now can we then 'prove' that it's also a draw
at
move N+1; if yes, then its proven by complete induction); anyway
reasoning along such standards, would be a better way to go i presume
than proof by a brute force search (although i've already done
something like that for the opening stage up to eg. move 25)

But who cares, for example you can prove the ''ideal gas law''
PV=RT by deriving it from the statistical molecule laws by
Boltzmann; an interesting mathematical exercise, but you
can also derive the law from experiment (although then it
appears reality is not behaving completely in line with the
mathematics, because of some other effect (non-ideal gas law).

In general induction in physics leads to a strong hypothesis,
which people can try to falsify; in mathematics its called
a conjecture, eg. before Fermats theorem a^N+b^N=c^N
(with N integer, only true for N 3) was proven by Wiley
it was already known to be true for different values of N,
and the conjecture was that is was true. Similar apparently
that checkers was known to be a draw as David Kane posted.

For chess in mathematical language it's also at least a
conjecture that its a draw, which is not placing the burdon
of proof on me, but on others imho, ie either to find
a rigorous proof in terms of complete induction simultaneous
applying also the chess rules (eg 3 times draw rule),
or, trying to falsify the meta-abstract empirical finding
that chess is a draw by showing winning lines for white
against every black defence possible, eg using
a quantum computer (well forget it i would say, there
are better ways to use computing power)

As for your 'induction' using the 50 move draw rule,
(didnt now that max length in chess is 4800 moves but
this indeed is another indication of its drawish nature),
in a next posting i can show two examples of the
50 moves rules, where black didn't even play 100% perfect
yet i.e white managed to get a small advantage
(which i corrected by introducing novelties for black)
but anyway in these games white's advantage already
wasnt enough to lead it to a win..

jef

below some drawn endgames with standard time control
(5 man egtb), dual core AMD4200x64
(in first two games you see 50 move rule,
thereafter insufficient material to mate),
some clear examples of the drawish nature of chess
(black didnt play 100 % perfect yet, lets say 99.8 % perfect,
white got a small advantage at least in the Rybka score,
but obviously couldnt win in the endgames(s) :

[Event "Test_long games"]
[Date "2008.02.09"]
[Round "24"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C94"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "271"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Nb8 10. d3 Nbd7 11. Nbd2 Bb7 12. Nf1 Nc5 13. Bc2 Re8 14. Be3
Bf8 15.
Ng3 g6 16. b4 Ne6 17. a4 Bg7 18. Bb3 Qe7 19. Qd2 Qd7 20. Qc2 Rec8 21.
d4 exd4
22. cxd4 d5 23. e5 Ne4 24. Nxe4 dxe4 25. Ng5 Nxg5 26. Bxg5 Bf8 27.
Rxe4 Qf5 28.
Rg4 Qxc2 29. Bxc2 Bxb4 30. axb5 axb5 31. Rb1 h5 32. Rg3 c5 33. e6 Ra6
34. Bf4
Kf8 35. exf7 Kxf7 36. Rg5 Ba8 37. Rd1 c4 38. Rxb5 Bd6 39. Bxd6 Rxd6
40. d5 c3
41. f4 Kf6 42. Kf2 Rcd8 43. Be4 c2 44. Bxc2 Bxd5 45. g4 hxg4 46. hxg4
g5 47. f5
Bc4 48. Rc5 Rd2+ 49. Kg3 Rxd1 50. Bxd1 Rd3+ 51. Kf2 Bf7 52. Be2 Ra3
53. Bf3
Ra2+ 54. Kg3 Ra3 55. Kg2 Ra2+ 56. Kh3 Rd2 57. Rc7 Rd3 58. Kg2 Ra3 59.
Kf2 Ra4
60. Kg3 Ra3 61. Rd7 Bc4 62. Kf2 Rd3 63. Rc7 Bf7 64. Rc1 Ra3 65. Rd1
Ra2+ 66.
Kg3 Ra3 67. Rd4 Ke5 68. Rd8 Rb3 69. Rd1 Bc4 70. Re1+ Kf6 71. Kf2 Rb2+
72. Kg1
Rb3 73. Rc1 Bd3 74. Rc8 Rb4 75. Kf2 Rf4 76. Rc6+ Ke5 77. Rc5+ Kf6 78.
Ke3 Bxf5
79. gxf5 Rxf5 80. Rc6+ Kg7 81. Be4 Rf6 82. Rc7+ Rf7 83. Rc5 Kf6 84.
Rc6+ Ke5
85. Rg6 Ra7 86. Rxg5+ Kd6 87. Rd5+ Ke6 88. Rf5 Ra3+ 89. Kf4 Ra7 90.
Rc5 Rd7 91.
Ke3 Kd6 92. Ra5 Rd8 93. Bd5 Ke5 94. Bc4+ Kf6 95. Ke4 Rf8 96. Rc5 Kg6
97. Bd3
Rd8 98. Rc6+ Kg5 99. Ke3 Rg8 100. Be4 Rg7 101. Rc5+ Kg4 102. Rf5 Ra7
103. Rf6
Rg7 104. Rf1 Kg5 105. Rf5+ Kg4 106. Rb5 Rf7 107. Rb6 Rg7 108. Rb1 Kg5
109. Rb5+
Kg4 110. Bf3+ Kg3 111. Rb4 Re7+ 112. Be4 Kg4 113. Rb2 Kg5 114. Rg2+
Kf6 115.
Kf4 Re6 116. Bf5 Rd6 117. Ke4 Rd1 118. Rg6+ Kf7 119. Ra6 Rb1 120. Be6+
Ke7 121.
Bd5 Rh1 122. Kd4 Rg1 123. Re6+ Kd7 124. Rb6 Ke7 125. Rb7+ Kd6 126. Bf3
Rg5 127.
Rb6+ Ke7 128. Ra6 Kf7 129. Be4 Kg7 130. Ra1 Rh5 131. Bf5 Rh4+ 132. Kd5
Kf6 133.
Bg4 Kf7 134. Kc6 Kf6 135. Rf1+ Ke7 136. Rf4 {50 moves rule} 1/2-1/2

'

[Event "Test_standard"]
[Date "2008.02.10"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D75"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "300"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 c5 6. Nc3 cxd4 7. Qxd4
Nc6 8. Qf4
Bc5!N 9. O-O O-O 10. Be3 Qe7 11. Rad1 Rab8 12. Ng5 Rfd8 13. b3 Bb4 14.
Nb5 d5 15.
cxd5 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Nf3 Rbc8 18. Rc1 Bc5 19. Rfd1 a6 20. Nbd4
Nxd4 21.
Bxd4 f6 22. Bxc5 bxc5 23. Rc2 g5 24. Qd2 Qe4 25. Ne1 Kg7 26. Rdc1 c4
27. f3 Qe6
28. Rc3 Qb6+ 29. Kf1 a5 30. Nc2 a4 31. Nd4 cxb3 32. axb3 a3 33. Ra1
Rxc3 34.
Qxc3 Ra8 35. Ra2 h5 36. Qe3 Kf7 37. Qd3 Kf8 38. Nc2 Bc8 39. Qd4 Qc6
40. Kf2 Kg7
41. Qe3 g4 42. Qe7+ Kg6 43. Nd4 Qd7 44. Qc5 Qa7 45. Qxa7 Rxa7 46. Nb5
Ra5 47.
Nxa3 gxf3 48. exf3 d4 49. Ra1 Rc5 50. Nc4 Be6 51. Ra4 Rb5 52. Nd2 d3
53. Ke3
Bxb3 54. Ra6 Bd5 55. Kxd3 Bb7 56. Rd6 Kf5 57. h4 Bd5 58. Ra6 Rb4 59.
Ra5 Ke6
60. Ra7 Kf5 61. Ke3 Kg6 62. Rd7 Rb5 63. Ne4 Rb3+ 64. Kf4 Rd3 65. Ra7
Rd4 66.
Ke3 Rc4 67. Ra1 Bxe4 68. fxe4 Rb4 69. Rc1 Rb3+ 70. Kf4 Rb2 71. Rd1
Rf2+ 72. Ke3
Rb2 73. Kf3 Rb3+ 74. Kf4 Rb4 75. Ra1 Rb2 76. Rf1 Rb4 77. Rd1 Rb2 78.
Ke3 Rb3+
79. Rd3 Rb2 80. Rd8 Rb3+ 81. Kf4 Rb1 82. Rg8+ Kf7 83. Ra8 Rf1+ 84. Ke3
Re1+ 85.
Kf3 Rb1 86. Ra7+ Kg6 87. Ra6 Rb3+ 88. Kf4 Rb1 89. Rd6 Kf7 90. Ke3 Re1+
91. Kf3
Rf1+ 92. Kg2 Re1 93. Rd7+ Kg6 94. Kf3 Rf1+ 95. Ke2 Rb1 96. Rd5 Rb3 97.
Rd3 Rb1
98. Rd7 Rb3 99. Rd8 Kf7 100. Rd3 Rb5 101. Kf3 Kg6 102. Rd5 Rb3+ 103.
Kf4 Rb1
104. Ra5 Rf1+ 105. Ke3 Rg1 106. Kf2 Rb1 107. Ra8 Rb3 108. Rh8 Ra3 109.
Rb8 Kf7
110. Rb7+ Kg6 111. Rb5 Rd3 112. Ra5 Rd4 113. Ke3 Rd1 114. Kf3 Rd3+
115. Kf4 Rd1
116. e5 Rf1+ 117. Ke3 Re1+ 118. Kd4 Rd1+ 119. Kc4 Rg1 120. Ra6 Kf5
121. exf6
Kg6 122. Ra8 Kf7 123. Ra3 Kxf6 124. Rf3+ Ke5 125. Kd3 Rb1 126. Ke3
Rb3+ 127.
Ke2 Rb2+ 128. Kf1 Ke4 129. Rf2 Rb5 130. Kg2 Ke5 131. Rc2 Kf6 132. Rc4
Rb3 133.
Rc6+ Kg7 134. Rc5 Kg6 135. Rg5+ Kh6 136. Re5 Kg6 137. Kf2 Ra3 138.
Rg5+ Kh6
139. Rd5 Kg6 140. Rd6+ Kf7 141. Kg2 Rc3 142. Rd5 Kg6 143. Rg5+ Kh6
144. Rb5 Kg6
145. Rd5 Ra3 146. Rg5+ Kh6 147. Re5 Kg6 148. Re6+ Kf7 149. Rc6 Rb3
150. Ra6 Rc3
{1/2-1/2 Arena Adjudication} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Test_long games"]
[Date "2008.02.08"]
[Round "13"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C92"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "153"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. a4 h6 13. d5 Nb8 14. c4 bxc4
15. Bxc4
a5 16. Bb5 c6 17. dxc6 Nxc6 18. Nc4 Re6 19. Bd2 Ne7 20. Qc2 Bxe4 21.
Rxe4 Nxe4
22. Bxa5 Rxa5 23. Nxa5 d5 24. Nc4 Ng6 25. Ne3 Bc5 26. Rd1 Bxe3 27.
fxe3 Qb6 28.
Re1 Qa5 29. Qc8+ Kh7 30. Qc1 f5 31. Qb1 Qb4 32. Rd1 Qd6 33. Qc2 Qb6
34. Re1 Nd6
35. b4 Re7 36. Qc6 Rb7 37. a5 Qxb5 38. Qxd6 Qxb4 39. Qxb4 Rxb4 40. Ra1
Rb7 41.
h4 h5 42. Rc1 Ra7 43. Rc5 e4 44. Ng5+ Kh6 45. g3 Ne7 46. Rb5 Ng8 47.
Rxd5 g6
48. Rc5 Nf6 49. Kf1 Nd7 50. Rd5 Kg7 51. Ne6+ Kf7 52. Nd8+ Ke8 53. Nc6
Ra6 54.
Rd6 Kf8 55. Kg2 Nc5 56. Rxg6 Nb3 57. Re6 Nd2 58. Nd4 Rxa5 59. Rf6+ Kg7
60. Rxf5
Rxf5 61. Nxf5+ Kf6 62. Nd4 Nc4 63. Kf2 Nb2 64. Ke2 Nc4 65. Nb5 Kf5 66.
Kf2 Kg4
67. Nc3 Nxe3 68. Kxe3 Kxg3 69. Kxe4 Kxh4 70. Kf4 Kh3 71. Kf3 Kh4 72.
Ne4 Kh3
73. Ng5+ Kh4 74. Nh7 Kh3 75. Nf6 Kh4 76. Kf4 Kh3 77. Nxh5 {
Insufficient material} 1/2-1/2

well i tried to log-in but with difficulties; first
the email with your verification code was blocked
by the spam filter of my server, but with web mail i
managed to find it. Second, after filling in the verification
code i got a new page saying 'page not found'.
anyway, logging in another time solved that problem,
(PS the board appears a to be a bit small,
no not the analysis board, thats very big..)

Are you still facing any problem in playing? Ask you spam filter to
allow mails from that email. Can you send me the details why the Spam
Filter Stopped the mail? What was the reasion for filtering it.

What is your webserver name and which filter do you use?

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

On Feb 10, 9:35*am, jefk wrote:
below some drawn endgames with standard time control
(5 man egtb), dual core AMD4200x64
(in first two games you see 50 move rule,
thereafter insufficient material to mate),
some clear examples of the drawish nature of chess
(black didnt play 100 % perfect yet, lets say 99.8 % perfect,
white got a small advantage at least in the Rybka score,
but obviously couldnt win in the endgames(s) :

[Event "Test_long games"]
[Date "2008.02.09"]
[Round "24"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C94"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "271"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Nb8 10. d3 Nbd7 11. Nbd2 Bb7 12. Nf1 Nc5 13. Bc2 Re8 14. Be3
Bf8 15.
Ng3 g6 16. b4 Ne6 17. a4 Bg7 18. Bb3 Qe7 19. Qd2 Qd7 20. Qc2 Rec8 21.
d4 exd4
22. cxd4 d5 23. e5 Ne4 24. Nxe4 dxe4 25. Ng5 Nxg5 26. Bxg5 Bf8 27.
Rxe4 Qf5 28.
Rg4 Qxc2 29. Bxc2 Bxb4 30. axb5 axb5 31. Rb1 h5 32. Rg3 c5 33. e6 Ra6
34. Bf4
Kf8 35. exf7 Kxf7 36. Rg5 Ba8 37. Rd1 c4 38. Rxb5 Bd6 39. Bxd6 Rxd6
40. d5 c3
41. f4 Kf6 42. Kf2 Rcd8 43. Be4 c2 44. Bxc2 Bxd5 45. g4 hxg4 46. hxg4
g5 47. f5
Bc4 48. Rc5 Rd2+ 49. Kg3 Rxd1 50. Bxd1 Rd3+ 51. Kf2 Bf7 52. Be2 Ra3
53. Bf3
Ra2+ 54. Kg3 Ra3 55. Kg2 Ra2+ 56. Kh3 Rd2 57. Rc7 Rd3 58. Kg2 Ra3 59.
Kf2 Ra4
60. Kg3 Ra3 61. Rd7 Bc4 62. Kf2 Rd3 63. Rc7 Bf7 64. Rc1 Ra3 65. Rd1
Ra2+ 66.
Kg3 Ra3 67. Rd4 Ke5 68. Rd8 Rb3 69. Rd1 Bc4 70. Re1+ Kf6 71. Kf2 Rb2+
72. Kg1
Rb3 73. Rc1 Bd3 74. Rc8 Rb4 75. Kf2 Rf4 76. Rc6+ Ke5 77. Rc5+ Kf6 78.
Ke3 Bxf5
79. gxf5 Rxf5 80. Rc6+ Kg7 81. Be4 Rf6 82. Rc7+ Rf7 83. Rc5 Kf6 84.
Rc6+ Ke5
85. Rg6 Ra7 86. Rxg5+ Kd6 87. Rd5+ Ke6 88. Rf5 Ra3+ 89. Kf4 Ra7 90.
Rc5 Rd7 91.
Ke3 Kd6 92. Ra5 Rd8 93. Bd5 Ke5 94. Bc4+ Kf6 95. Ke4 Rf8 96. Rc5 Kg6
97. Bd3
Rd8 98. Rc6+ Kg5 99. Ke3 Rg8 100. Be4 Rg7 101. Rc5+ Kg4 102. Rf5 Ra7
103. Rf6
Rg7 104. Rf1 Kg5 105. Rf5+ Kg4 106. Rb5 Rf7 107. Rb6 Rg7 108. Rb1 Kg5
109. Rb5+
Kg4 110. Bf3+ Kg3 111. Rb4 Re7+ 112. Be4 Kg4 113. Rb2 Kg5 114. Rg2+
Kf6 115.
Kf4 Re6 116. Bf5 Rd6 117. Ke4 Rd1 118. Rg6+ Kf7 119. Ra6 Rb1 120. Be6+
Ke7 121.
Bd5 Rh1 122. Kd4 Rg1 123. Re6+ Kd7 124. Rb6 Ke7 125. Rb7+ Kd6 126. Bf3
Rg5 127.
Rb6+ Ke7 128. Ra6 Kf7 129. Be4 Kg7 130. Ra1 Rh5 131. Bf5 Rh4+ 132. Kd5
Kf6 133.
Bg4 Kf7 134. Kc6 Kf6 135. Rf1+ Ke7 136. Rf4 {50 moves rule} 1/2-1/2

'

[Event "Test_standard"]
[Date "2008.02.10"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D75"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "300"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 b6 4. g3 Bb7 5. Bg2 c5 6. Nc3 cxd4 7. Qxd4
Nc6 8. Qf4
Bc5!N 9. O-O O-O 10. Be3 Qe7 11. Rad1 Rab8 12. Ng5 Rfd8 13. b3 Bb4 14.
Nb5 d5 15.
cxd5 Nxd5 16. Bxd5 exd5 17. Nf3 Rbc8 18. Rc1 Bc5 19. Rfd1 a6 20. Nbd4
Nxd4 21.
Bxd4 f6 22. Bxc5 bxc5 23. Rc2 g5 24. Qd2 Qe4 25. Ne1 Kg7 26. Rdc1 c4
27. f3 Qe6
28. Rc3 Qb6+ 29. Kf1 a5 30. Nc2 a4 31. Nd4 cxb3 32. axb3 a3 33. Ra1
Rxc3 34.
Qxc3 Ra8 35. Ra2 h5 36. Qe3 Kf7 37. Qd3 Kf8 38. Nc2 Bc8 39. Qd4 Qc6
40. Kf2 Kg7
41. Qe3 g4 42. Qe7+ Kg6 43. Nd4 Qd7 44. Qc5 Qa7 45. Qxa7 Rxa7 46. Nb5
Ra5 47.
Nxa3 gxf3 48. exf3 d4 49. Ra1 Rc5 50. Nc4 Be6 51. Ra4 Rb5 52. Nd2 d3
53. Ke3
Bxb3 54. Ra6 Bd5 55. Kxd3 Bb7 56. Rd6 Kf5 57. h4 Bd5 58. Ra6 Rb4 59.
Ra5 Ke6
60. Ra7 Kf5 61. Ke3 Kg6 62. Rd7 Rb5 63. Ne4 Rb3+ 64. Kf4 Rd3 65. Ra7
Rd4 66.
Ke3 Rc4 67. Ra1 Bxe4 68. fxe4 Rb4 69. Rc1 Rb3+ 70. Kf4 Rb2 71. Rd1
Rf2+ 72. Ke3
Rb2 73. Kf3 Rb3+ 74. Kf4 Rb4 75. Ra1 Rb2 76. Rf1 Rb4 77. Rd1 Rb2 78.
Ke3 Rb3+
79. Rd3 Rb2 80. Rd8 Rb3+ 81. Kf4 Rb1 82. Rg8+ Kf7 83. Ra8 Rf1+ 84. Ke3
Re1+ 85.
Kf3 Rb1 86. Ra7+ Kg6 87. Ra6 Rb3+ 88. Kf4 Rb1 89. Rd6 Kf7 90. Ke3 Re1+
91. Kf3
Rf1+ 92. Kg2 Re1 93. Rd7+ Kg6 94. Kf3 Rf1+ 95. Ke2 Rb1 96. Rd5 Rb3 97.
Rd3 Rb1
98. Rd7 Rb3 99. Rd8 Kf7 100. Rd3 Rb5 101. Kf3 Kg6 102. Rd5 Rb3+ 103.
Kf4 Rb1
104. Ra5 Rf1+ 105. Ke3 Rg1 106. Kf2 Rb1 107. Ra8 Rb3 108. Rh8 Ra3 109.
Rb8 Kf7
110. Rb7+ Kg6 111. Rb5 Rd3 112. Ra5 Rd4 113. Ke3 Rd1 114. Kf3 Rd3+
115. Kf4 Rd1
116. e5 Rf1+ 117. Ke3 Re1+ 118. Kd4 Rd1+ 119. Kc4 Rg1 120. Ra6 Kf5
121. exf6
Kg6 122. Ra8 Kf7 123. Ra3 Kxf6 124. Rf3+ Ke5 125. Kd3 Rb1 126. Ke3
Rb3+ 127.
Ke2 Rb2+ 128. Kf1 Ke4 129. Rf2 Rb5 130. Kg2 Ke5 131. Rc2 Kf6 132. Rc4
Rb3 133.
Rc6+ Kg7 134. Rc5 Kg6 135. Rg5+ Kh6 136. Re5 Kg6 137. Kf2 Ra3 138.
Rg5+ Kh6
139. Rd5 Kg6 140. Rd6+ Kf7 141. Kg2 Rc3 142. Rd5 Kg6 143. Rg5+ Kh6
144. Rb5 Kg6
145. Rd5 Ra3 146. Rg5+ Kh6 147. Re5 Kg6 148. Re6+ Kf7 149. Rc6 Rb3
150. Ra6 Rc3
{1/2-1/2 Arena Adjudication} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Test_long games"]
[Date "2008.02.08"]
[Round "13"]
[White "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.x64 [mainbk [001]"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "C92"]
[WhiteElo "3200"]
[BlackElo "3200"]
[PlyCount "153"]
[TimeControl "5400"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3
d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. a4 h6 13. d5 Nb8 14. c4 bxc4
15. Bxc4
a5 16. Bb5 c6 17. dxc6 Nxc6 18. Nc4 Re6 19. Bd2 Ne7 20. Qc2 Bxe4 21.
Rxe4 Nxe4
22. Bxa5 Rxa5 23. Nxa5 d5 24. Nc4 Ng6 25. Ne3 Bc5 26. Rd1 Bxe3 27.
fxe3 Qb6 28.
Re1 Qa5 29. Qc8+ Kh7 30. Qc1 f5 31. Qb1 Qb4 32. Rd1 Qd6 33. Qc2 Qb6
34. Re1 Nd6
35. b4 Re7 36. Qc6 Rb7 37. a5 Qxb5 38. Qxd6 Qxb4 39. Qxb4 Rxb4 40. Ra1
Rb7 41.
h4 h5 42. Rc1 Ra7 43. Rc5 e4 44. Ng5+ Kh6 45. g3 Ne7 46. Rb5 Ng8 47.
Rxd5 g6
48. Rc5 Nf6 49. Kf1 Nd7 50. Rd5 Kg7 51. Ne6+ Kf7 52. Nd8+ Ke8 53. Nc6
Ra6 54.
Rd6 Kf8 55. Kg2 Nc5 56. Rxg6 Nb3 57. Re6 Nd2 58. Nd4 Rxa5 59. Rf6+ Kg7
60. Rxf5
Rxf5 61. Nxf5+ Kf6 62. Nd4 Nc4 63. Kf2 Nb2 64. Ke2 Nc4 65. Nb5 Kf5 66.
Kf2 Kg4
67. Nc3 Nxe3 68. Kxe3 Kxg3 69. Kxe4 Kxh4 70. Kf4 Kh3 71. Kf3 Kh4 72.
Ne4 Kh3
73. Ng5+ Kh4 74. Nh7 Kh3 75. Nf6 Kh4 76. Kf4 Kh3 77. Nxh5 {
Insufficient material} 1/2-1/2

You are proving that players with equal ratings draw each other.
What's the surprise that a computer, playing itself with the same
evaluation functions, draws?

On Feb 10, 7:46 pm, wrote:

You are proving that players with equal ratings draw each other.
What's the surprise that a computer, playing itself with the same
evaluation functions, draws?

the point was not the engine, but the opening lines,
played with the strongest engine possible.
there's simply no other engine as strong as Rybka.
if i would play inferior opening lines, played with
the same engine, you still can expect to see
wins for white (in case of inferior line for black,
eg an unsound gambit like the Latvian)
or wins for black (in case of inferior lines for white,
eg an unsound gambit, eg e4 g5?)

i've also played rybka vs other engines ofcourse,
but then the effect of opening theory is marginal,
the engine still is more important, but i expect
this effect will later converge to almost 100 % draws.

as i wrote earlier, with a ryba on a fast comp,
playing against the -even stronger- supercomp/engine
Hydra, i would still expect a lot of draws.

The higher the average rating between the two engines, the
higher the drawing margin, provided the opening lines
are correct. so in perfect chess, all games will be draw.

On Feb 10, 7:44 pm, Sanny wrote:

Are you still facing any problem in playing?

no i managed to get in, although i got an email asking me to
verify the verification code, and when i did that i got
the message 'verification code and user id dont match'';
get i could simply login, thereafter, so it *does* match..

Ask you spam filter to allow mails from that email.
i've simply reset the settings eg accepting the sender
for that particular email

Can you send me the details why the Spam
Filter Stopped the mail? What was the reasion for filtering it.

dont know, its a filter at the internet provider, and these
filters are never perfect; it probably recognizes
you getclub.com is a commercial site

What is your webserver name and which filter do you use?

well you can see which provider people have from
their email, so you have to ask such providers
which kind of filters they use

jef
PS i found the applause after each chess move
annoying, and again, i hope you can implement
this 3 move drawing rule. i also suspect
the beginner level now has higher rating
in fact than the 1000 you have estimated,
but maybe that's based on standard
time controls when a human would play
eg a long game of 90 minutes; most humans
wont have the patience to play such game,
and would only take about 10 minutes, eg.
blitz to play a game of chess at your site

Bye
Sanny

Play Chess at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html

On Feb 11, 7:27 am, jefk wrote:
the engine still is more important, but i expect
this effect will later converge to almost 100 % draws.

as it's a bit vague, let's illustrate this further;
what i wrote that Rybka probably draws against Hydra
is just an assumption, from estimating playing strength;
now i've seen from their site that Donninger is busy
with a newer version, and this new Hydra, lets call
it Hydra-plus, might beat Rybka again, also with black,
as engines still are more important than book lines

but this is not the point; the question is how would
a perfect engine play with white vs black, and then
again i expect that hydra would draw against itself,
using of course high quality/solid black book lines.

but even the new 'Hydraplus' wont be perfect yet,
lets assume we are near (almost) perfect chess,
lets say a ''Superhydra'' would play (999.99999999999 %)
'perfect' chess, then i indeed would expect black to draw
when this engine would play against itself; book lines
would have become more important, but i dont
expect very much, i.e no siginificant, but only tiny
more improvements in the main book lines which
i've already found out, often up to move 25 or so

also, when playing similar almost perfect engines
against each other, the draw percentage theoretically
would approach 100 %, that is, if neither side is
resorting to 'outbooking' tricks, ie assuming almost
perfect opening books for both sides. reason, well
maybe indeed as Sanny pointed out, such
games might get much longer, and then the 50 move
draw rule will more often play a role, and certainly
(apparently) when approaching the 4500 move game length

jef

PS1 now posted only to chess.analysis
(and for mathematical logical discussions i still think that
eg. the chess thinkers forum on icdchess would be
more appropriate, as other wise we would get off topic)
PS2 correction to what i wrote earlier

with a ryba on a fast comp,
playing against the -even stronger- supercomp/engine
Hydra, i would still expect a lot of draws.

wasnt entirely correct i must admit, either the old Hydra is
stronger then rybka, then it still might win games with black,
or its equally strong then indeed we might expect draws