Coincidence Statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik
with recommendations of the chess program Fritz 9
Elista, October 4, 2006
After very detailed analyze of all games of the match we would like to present to your attention coincidence statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik with recommendations of chess program Fritz 9.
First game:
From 75 moves: After the 12th move of Topalov Ba6, a novelty, from 65 remaining moves – 41 moves match with the first line of Fritz 9. (63% of matches)
Second game:
From 63 moves: After 17th move, where the theory ends, from remaining 46 moves – 40 moves match with the first line of Fritz 9. (87% of matches)
Third game
From 38 moves: after 10th move, when the theory ends, from 46 remaining moves – 40 match with the first line of Fritz 9. (86% of matches)
Forth game:
From 54 moves: After 14th move, when the theory ends, from 40 remaining moves – 30 match with the first line of Fritz 9. (75% of matches)
Sixth game:
From 31 moves: After 13th move, when the theory ends, from 18 remaining moves – 14 match with the first line of Fritz9. (78% of matches)
Thus, out of 5 games – 78% of GM Kramnik’s moves match with the first line of Fritz9.
Sincerely
Silvio Danailov
http://forumforme.com/showthread.php?p=36#post36
Yawn....
you again??
anyhoo, here are some questions so we can make those relevant.
1. How were the statistics obtained? Was fritz just allowed to run until it match Kramniks move, or was it set to a certain ply/ time?
2. What is Topalovs matchup?
3. How many of the moves are forcing moves/openings/checks/captures etc.
4. How many moves had a multiple "good" moves.
5. Does Kramnik train with fritz?
6. What was Topalovs match?
7. What is the match of other Super GMs?
Fritz is 78% as good as Kramnik, thats very impressive =)
Edit: oh yeah, go take a stats class. If you had one, you wouldn't have bothered to copy this nonsense without conclusive proof.
Originally posted by zebanoI secound these points; but I'd also like to add:-
Yawn....
you again??
anyhoo, here are some questions so we can make those relevant.
1. How were the statistics obtained? Was fritz just allowed to run until it match Kramniks move, or was it set to a certain ply/ time?
2. What is Topalovs matchup?
3. How many of the moves are forcing moves/openings/checks/captures etc.
4. How many moves had a mu ...[text shortened]... s. If you had one, you wouldn't have bothered to copy this nonsense without conclusive proof.
80% is 2 in 10 moves.
this must mean - that even if Krammik cheats using Fritz, he still has to use his brain 2 in 10 moves --- If he was a patzer, GM's would simply crush him.
Even using a chess program half the time is a huge advantage. If you could use a chess program for a few of your moves in your own game wouldn't you have won some of those games you lost? You just have to know when to use them.
They have human+computer vs human vs computer games. They have restriction of course about how long they can use it, how many moves etc... but they said Anand + a computer = 3200.
So even using it 5 moves a game out of 40 moves is a huge huge advantage.
I'm not saying he is or he isn't.
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
Originally posted by Los AngelesI swear you're stupid. I cant even be bothered to spend the time typing to crush this pointless prattle so I will just give you a link to Chess Ninja's which highlights the many flaws in Danailov's naff.
I would like more Kramnik's games to be analyzed for patterns.
The suspicions are really high. There are way too many variations in a chess game, and to have 78% coincidance is a lot.
I doubt Kramnik created Fritz 9 so he could claim the engine things like him.
http://www.chessninja.com/dailydirt/2006/10/danailov_accuses_kramnik_of_cheating.htm
- Joined
- 21 Apr 06
- Moves
- 4211
To quote Jonathan Rowson
First law of of probablity: Correlation does not prove causation.
Second law of probability: Check prior probability before suggesting the correlation is meaningful.
Third law of probability: If something is suggested by Danailov, it is probably false
Originally posted by Los AngelesThat's a novel idea: show a failure to understand in one thread, and then start another thread after others have pointed it out.
Coincidence Statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik
with recommendations of the chess program Fritz 9
Elista, October 4, 2006
After very detailed analyze of all games of the match we would like to present to your attention coincidence statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik with recommendations of chess program Fritz 9.
First game:
From 75 moves: A ...[text shortened]... z9.
Sincerely
Silvio Danailov
http://forumforme.com/showthread.php?p=36#post36[/b]
RBHill?
Originally posted by Los AngelesHmmm! Yeah, Kram the Sham! Like I've always said! Topalov isn't too off! The Russian cheated! Oh, and I hope you all know that human moves mixed with computers moves versus an opponent is virtually invincible. Look what happened with Kasparov and Deep Blue? Don't tell me GM Joel Benjamin wasn't helping out Deep Blue to get a little Christmas Bonus from IBM.
Coincidence Statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik
with recommendations of the chess program Fritz 9
Elista, October 4, 2006
After very detailed analyze of all games of the match we would like to present to your attention coincidence statistics of the moves of GM Kramnik with recommendations of chess program Fritz 9.
First game:
From 75 moves: A ...[text shortened]... z9.
Sincerely
Silvio Danailov
http://forumforme.com/showthread.php?p=36#post36[/b]
Originally posted by powershakerJoel was just the blunder check...deep did all the real thinking...plus its more intimidating to see a gm running the computer
Hmmm! Yeah, Kram the Sham! Like I've always said! Topalov isn't too off! The Russian cheated! Oh, and I hope you all know that human moves mixed with computers moves versus an opponent is virtually invincible. Look what happened with Kasparov and Deep Blue? Don't tell me GM Joel Benjamin wasn't helping out Deep Blue to get a little Christmas Bonus from IBM.
Originally posted by powershakerDidn't we go over this before powershaker? There is no evidence that Deep Blue was helped by humans. You can look at the logs that it outputted during the match yourself if you wish. They are available online. But hey, why let some facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory?
Hmmm! Yeah, Kram the Sham! Like I've always said! Topalov isn't too off! The Russian cheated! Oh, and I hope you all know that human moves mixed with computers moves versus an opponent is virtually invincible. Look what happened with Kasparov and Deep Blue? Don't tell me GM Joel Benjamin wasn't helping out Deep Blue to get a little Christmas Bonus from IBM.
Originally posted by XanthosNZXanthosNZ, My idea was that this thinking lines were not published, and that is why Kasparov was claiming the human help, or am I wrong?
Didn't we go over this before powershaker? There is no evidence that Deep Blue was helped by humans. You can look at the logs that it outputted during the match yourself if you wish. They are available online. But hey, why let some facts stand in the way of a good conspiracy theory?
What is the "normal" correlation between Fritz and a top grandmaster percentage wise? Does anybody have an idea? There must be a way to scan the area to pick up any electronic devices, keep everything transparent. i don't think kramnik cheated. there are rumours in Russia that Topalov has gone to California to install a computer chip in his brain. it goes on and on.