Originally posted by woodypusherNot only did Ivanov lose a game he should have drawn with no problem, his matchup rates with Houdini was not that great as you had claimed, if this is the game you were referring to. Go back to the drawing board. Come up with another game.
Nice! Very thorough. I admit I never looked at the game. I presumed Ivanov had won, not lost. How does Houdini 1.5 match up with Houdini 2?
The Instructor
Originally posted by RJHindsCare to bet on whether Ivanov cheats or not? Let's give it five years. (Lance Armstrong didn't admit it until 2012. He won his first TDF in 1999, 13 years before.) I'll bet he gets caught or admits it in that time. Today is June 10, 2013. We can both can copy and paste this.
Not only did Ivanov lose a game he should have drawn with no problem, his matchup rates with Houdini was not that great as you had claimed, if this is the game you were referring to. Go back to the drawing board. Come up with another game.
The Instructor
I said I never saw the game. I went by what was written on chessbase: Ivanov’s play has repeatedly demonstrated an unprecedentedly high move correlation with that of the strongest chess engine, Houdini.
According to them,
"In the flawless games he has around 98%-99% match with Houdini.
In studies of comparisons of World Champions and Programs, Capablanca and Carlsen had around 93% of match.
So Ivanov would be even better than the greatest in the history of chess, do you think that's possible or Ivanov would be just cheating?"
So if you believe Ivanov is greater than Capablanca and Carlsen, you are a fool.
I can't prove you use an engine either. But to play '700 pts' over your OTB is strong evidence.
more games (from youtube kingscrusher)
FrankBGambit: Ivanov, Borislav (Black)- Accuracy 100% Blunders 0 (0%.) Mistakes 0 (0%.) Sub Opt 0(0%.) Exp-Px 0.09 Obs-Px 0.5 Exp IPR 2631 Raw Err= 0.068-62.5%(15/24), Book Err= 0.123-13.3%(2/15)), Middle Err= 0.021-82.35% (14/17), Endgame Err= - NQ moves. Black Candidate Moves= Top1- 62.5% (15/24)-Top2- 70.8% (17/24)-Top3- 75% (18/24)-Top4- 79.2% (19/24) Most Consectutive Candiate moves made 10 from move 31..
[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.16"]
[Round "1.18"]
[White "Ivanov, Borislav"]
[Black "Schachinger, Mario"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E92"]
[WhiteElo "2227"]
[BlackElo "2426"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "2012.12.16"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "CRO"]
[Source "crochess.com"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Be2 e5 6. Nf3 O-O 7. dxe5 dxe5 8.
Qxd8 Rxd8 9. Bg5 c6 10. Nxe5 Re8 11. O-O-O Na6 12. Rd6 Be6 13. f4 Nc5 14. Bf3
h6 15. Bh4 Nfd7 16. Nxd7 Nxd7 17. Kc2 Nf8 18. b3 g5 19. Bg3 gxf4 20. Bxf4 Ng6
21. Be3 Ne5 22. Rhd1 f5 23. Bh5 Nf7 24. R6d2 Re7 25. Bc5 Rc7 26. Rf2 fxe4 27.
Nxe4 Kh8 28. Nf6 b6 29. Ba3 c5 30. Re1 Nd8 31. Bb2 Re7 32. Nd5 Bf5+ 33. Rxf5
Rxe1 34. Rf8+ Kh7 35. Nf6+ 1-0
[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.17"]
[Round "2.7"]
[White "Jovanic, Ognjen"]
[Black "Ivanov, Borislav"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D45"]
[WhiteElo "2583"]
[BlackElo "2227"]
[PlyCount "235"]
[EventDate "2012.12.16"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "CRO"]
[Source "crochess.com"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.22"]
....
[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.17"]
[Round "3.12"]
[White "Ivanov, Borislav"]
[Black "Kurajica, Bojan"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E11"]
[WhiteElo "2227"]
[BlackElo "2565"]
[PlyCount "69"]
[EventDate "2012.12.16"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "CRO"]
[Source "crochess.com"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. g3 Bb4+ 4. Bd2 c5 5. Bxb4 cxb4 6. Bg2 O-O 7. Nf3 d6 8.
O-O Qe7 9. a3 bxa3 10. Rxa3 b6 11. Nc3 Bb7 12. d5 e5 13. Nh4 g6 14. Qd2 Nh5 15.
Qh6 f5 16. e4 Ng7 17. exf5 gxf5 18. Nb5 Rf6 19. Qg5 Qf7 20. Rxa7 Rxa7 21. Nxa7
f4 22. Ra1 Na6 23. Nc6 Bc8 24. Nf5 Bxf5 25. Rxa6 h6 26. Qh4 Bd3 27. Rxb6 e4 28.
Rb7 Qxb7 29. Qxf6 e3 30. fxe3 fxe3 31. Ne7+ Kh7 32. Qf8 h5 33. Qg8+ Kh6 34.
Qh8+ Bh7 35. Be4 1-0
[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.18"]
[Round "4.7"]
[White "Kuljasevic, Davorin"]
[Black "Ivanov, Borislav"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ECO "D85"]
[WhiteElo "2561"]
[BlackElo "2227"]
[PlyCount "67"]
[EventDate "2012.12.16"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "CRO"]
[Source "crochess.com"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 d5 4. cxd5 Nxd5 5. e4 Nxc3 6. bxc3 Bg7 7. Nf3 c5 8.
Be3 Qa5 9. Qd2 Nc6 10. Rb1 a6 11. Rc1 cxd4 12. cxd4 Qxd2+ 13. Kxd2 f5 14. e5 h6
15. h4 Be6 16. Bc4 Bxc4 17. Rxc4 O-O 18. Ke2 Rad8 19. Rb1 Rd7 20. Rb6 e6 21. g3
Rfd8 22. Rc1 Re7 23. Rc4 Red7 24. Rc3 Rc7 25. Rc4 Rcd7 26. Nd2 Nxd4+ 27. Bxd4
Rxd4 28. Rxd4 Rxd4 29. Rxe6 Kf7 30. Rb6 Bxe5 31. Rxb7+ Ke6 32. Rh7 Rg4 33. Rxh6
Kf7 34. h5 1/2-1/2
[Event "19th Open A"]
[Site "Zadar"]
[Date "2012.12.19"]
[Round "5.7"]
[White "Ivanov, Borislav"]
[Black "Zelcic, Robert"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A45"]
[WhiteElo "2227"]
[BlackElo "2560"]
[PlyCount "63"]
[EventDate "2012.12.16"]
[EventRounds "9"]
[EventCountry "CRO"]
[Source "crochess.com"]
[SourceDate "2012.12.22"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. Bg5 Ne4 3. Bf4 c5 4. f3 Qa5+ 5. c3 Nf6 6. d5 Qb6 7. b3 e6 8. e4
exd5 9. exd5 d6 10. Bc4 Be7 11. Ne2 Nh5 12. Be3 O-O 13. O-O f5 14. Nd2 Nd7 15.
b4 Qc7 16. Re1 cxb4 17. cxb4 Ne5 18. Rc1 Bh4 19. g3 f4 20. Nxf4 Nxf4 21. Bxf4
Rxf4 22. gxf4 Nxc4 23. Re8+ Kf7 24. Qe2 b5 25. Nxc4 bxc4 26. Rxc4 Qb6+ 27. Kh1
Bd7 28. Rxa8 Qb7 29. Rh8 h6 30. Qe4 Bf6 31. Rc1 Qa6 32. Rg1 1-0
Originally posted by woodypusherAre you basing this off of chessbase as well? Then you might want to do your own research, its probably more credible.
Care to bet on whether Ivanov cheats or not? Let's give it five years. (Lance Armstrong didn't admit it until 2012. He won his first TDF in 1999, 13 years before.) I'll bet he gets caught or admits it in that time. Today is June 10, 2013. We can both can copy and paste this.
I said I never saw the game. I went by what was written on chessbase: Ivanov’ ...[text shortened]... prove you use an engine either. But to play '700 pts' over your OTB is strong evidence.
Originally posted by woodypusherThis is more evidence of him not cheating. His top 1 match up rate was 62.5 and his top 3 was 75%... Really awesome for blitz but not on par with ridiculous claims made against him.
[b]more games (from youtube kingscrusher)
FrankBGambit: Ivanov, Borislav (Black)- Accuracy 100% Blunders 0 (0%.) Mistakes 0 (0%.) Sub Opt 0(0%.) Exp-Px 0.09 Obs-Px 0.5 Exp IPR 2631 Raw Err= 0.068-62.5%(15/24), Book Err= 0.123-13.3%(2/15)), Middle Err= 0.021-82.35% (14/17), Endgame Err= - NQ moves. Black Candidate Moves= Top1- 62.5% (15/24)-Top2- 70.8% (17/ ...[text shortened]...
Originally posted by woodypusherWhere is the game with the 99 or 100% matchup rate? That is the game we need.
Care to bet on whether Ivanov cheats or not? Let's give it five years. (Lance Armstrong didn't admit it until 2012. He won his first TDF in 1999, 13 years before.) I'll bet he gets caught or admits it in that time. Today is June 10, 2013. We can both can copy and paste this.
I said I never saw the game. I went by what was written on chessbase: Ivanov’ ...[text shortened]... prove you use an engine either. But to play '700 pts' over your OTB is strong evidence.
The Instructor
Interesting comment from chessgames.com:
according to the poster, the odds of Ivanov matching 27 consecutive moves of an Houdini are more than one in 18 QUINTILLION. Others pointed out that was too high as some moves were forced. Still they say it's basically zero chance
senojes: To get some idea of the improbability of two chess games containing a series of 27 identical moves in a row by chance:
Assume for the sake of illustration that there are 4 candidate moves (e.g. as listed by a chess engine) in each of 27 positions in a chess game. The probability that two players (or one player and a chess engine) would play a series of 27 identical moves in a row by chance in a game would then be of the order of 1 in 4^27, i.e. 1 in ~1.8x10^16 or 18 followed by 15 zeros. To be more exact, using Windows 7's calculator, it would be 1 in 18,014,398,509,481,984!
If someone wants to quibble about the number of candidate moves then they can plug their own estimate in. I used 4 candidate moves per move to be conservative. The improbability will still be ASTRONOMICAL that Ivanov (rating 2277) by chance played exactly the same move as Houdini 3 (rating 3344) for 27 moves in a row in a game of chess.
And as we shall see, that also happened in at least one other Ivanov game (I haven't checked then all out yet) in the same tournament.
Stephen E. Jones
Jan-08-13
Maatalkko: <senojes> I have to quibble a little with your math. In a wide-open position, sure there might be an average of four candidate moves that a GM would consider. However, there are also plenty of positions with forced recaptures, obvious plans, etc. where there are either one or two possibilities. For example, if there are 27 moves but seven are forced, then 4^20 is "only" one in ten trillion.
Obviously, your point remains valid. Try to play a consultation game with a friend of similar strength to you, and you will see how quickly two equal players will choose totally divergent paths. The odds of ANY two players choosing 27 identical moves are basically zero, let alone two players 1000 points apart in strength.
Jan-08-13 csmath: There are at least two games by Ivanov that match move-by-move Houdini engine. The best chess players in the world cannot do this, they deviate and sometimes not bad at all but they deviate. This guy was clearly using chess engine and not just any engine. He was using Houdini version 2.
Ivanov also claims he BEAT BOTH HOUDINI AND RYBKA BY A SCORE OF 10-0 EACH.
"I dont think there was anything special in my games at all. The Croatian GMs made some horrible mistakes during our games. Of course I practiced a lot with the computer, and after beating Rybka and Houdini by 10-0 each, i was absolutelly sure that no-one was gonna stop me winning. After all the arbiters were kind of polite and intelligent, you know, the other players weren't though..."
I guess if you believe he doesn't cheat, or that he's better than Carlsen & Capablanca, you'll believe his outrageous claim about CRUSHING those two 3200+ elo engines.
Give me a break.
Originally posted by woodypusherYes it is hard to believe, but it appears that all we have are rumors right now. Should we believe the rumors?
Interesting comment from chessgames.com:
according to the poster, the odds of Ivanov matching 27 consecutive moves of an Houdini are more than one in 18 QUINTILLION. Others pointed out that was too high as some moves were forced. Still they say it's basically zero chance
senojes: To get some idea of the improbability of two chess games containing ...[text shortened]... his outrageous claim about CRUSHING those two 3200+ elo engines.
Give me a break.
The Instructor
Originally posted by tomtom232Gullible means being easily convinced of things that aren't true.
You're right, you apparently dont know what gullible even means.
For example, you think the Seahawks might someday win a Super Bowl. If that's not gullible I don't know what is.
Originally posted by USArmyParatrooperThats why jarheads shouldnt take an interest in words or their definitions, all they know how to do is shoot people, they have been persuaded, deserve death. Therin lies the difference, persuasion is an act carried out by a third party whereas being convinced comes from ones own thoughts.
Gullible means being easily convinced of things that aren't true.
For example, you think the Seahawks might someday win a Super Bowl. If that's not gullible I don't know what is.