25 Nov 17
Originally posted by @ogbHi ogb,
uhh remember Kasparov and deep Blue ??
I do remember Kasparov and Deep Blue,
Stockfiss is much better than Deep Blue, but the quality of my games and the employed strategies are also much much better.
Yesterday I was just browsing those Deep Blue-Kasparov games from 1996/7 and have been wondering at the relatively low quality of the games.
- Joined
- 20 May 17
- Moves
- 17535
26 Nov 17
Originally posted by @lyudmil-tsvetkovOK let us know when you have investigated further..
I
Only very few people have the guts and are ready to put the hard effort to investigate further.
But that is how life is: one should not write original stuff.
26 Nov 17
Originally posted by @lyudmil-tsvetkovYou never answered the question if you are going to play here.
It is difficult to write original stuff, people know what they know and believe what they hear.
Only very few people have the guts and are ready to put the hard effort to investigate further.
But that is how life is: one should not write original stuff.
29 Nov 17
Originally posted by @ogbI have already investigated. My contributions to Stockfish and computer chess are recorded
OK let us know when you have investigated further..
in multiple posts and on multiple sites.
If it is that easy, why don't you simply play some games and beat Stockfish?
Sure, you can do it.
29 Nov 17
Originally posted by @sonhouseI don't like playing online for multiple reasons:
You never answered the question if you are going to play here.
- people are using engines
- time lag frequently wins/loses games, especially at faster TC
- people often play anonymously, etc.
If you check 100 positions of 'Human versus Machine', in 90% of those Stockfish will be thinking it is equal or the engine side is better, when actually the human side has (large/winning) advantage, so it is easy to demonstrate the games are real.
29 Nov 17
It is funny that, when people could see, even only browsing the table of contents of 'The Secret of Chess', https://www.amazon.com/Secret-Chess-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov-ebook/dp/B074M85CVV , that the book contains 150 fully original/new chess knowledge terms/patterns, they still doubt the book is worth it.
Really funny...
03 Dec 17
I am so happy, the first review for 'The Secret of Chess' has appeared,
and by none other than Australian GM and book reviewer David Smerdon:
http://davidsmerdon.com/?p=1970
Thank you, David!
The review is also available on the chess.com blog of the grandmaster:
https://www.chess.com/blog/smurfo/the-secret-of-chess
03 Dec 17
Originally posted by @lyudmil-tsvetkovNo one here takes you seriously.
I am so happy, the first review for 'The Secret of Chess' has appeared,
and by none other than Australian GM and book reviewer David Smerdon:
http://davidsmerdon.com/?p=1970
Thank you, David!
The review is also available on the chess.com blog of the grandmaster:
https://www.chess.com/blog/smurfo/the-secret-of-chess
You are down in the gutter with other spammers like that ARB chess system guy.
03 Dec 17
Originally posted by @lyudmil-tsvetkovOK, I read GM Smerdon's blog, and it has changed my opinion from my original reaction, which was poor.
I am so happy, the first review for 'The Secret of Chess' has appeared,
and by none other than Australian GM and book reviewer David Smerdon:
http://davidsmerdon.com/?p=1970
Thank you, David!
The review is also available on the chess.com blog of the grandmaster:
https://www.chess.com/blog/smurfo/the-secret-of-chess
I am going to get the kindle edition in the next few days, and attempt a superficial review ( I work for Disney, and the holidays are crazy for us).
Based on Smerdon's review, I suspect that those of us who have read Kmoch and Berliner will say -"OMG! Hans and Hans had a child, and his name is Tsvetkov!" -which I intend to be complimentary and funny at the same time!
04 Dec 17
Originally posted by @bigdoggproblemThank you.
No one here takes you seriously.
You are down in the gutter with other spammers like that ARB chess system guy.