Who will win the championship?

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4123

Beren the 32nd: I think the winner will be Kramnik. He is very strong.

inpassant: What about Anand? He has a higher rating.

Beren the 32nd: Yes, Anand is now on top of the FIDE list. He is a strong chess player, but I would say that Kramnik has more experience in this kind of tournament. I like both, though. Anand lives in Spain and many chess players say that he is a very nice person.

Kramnik likes to draw too much and probably will not finish much above the middle of the field. Plus no toilets to hide in this time! If Anand's form holds up he probably will win the event. It is too bad Topalov was not invited. He probably would have livened up the field. As it is only 9 of the 30 games finished so far have ended in a decision.

panzerschiffwhat site do you go to to see the game scored? tx:

ouspensky: See http://www.chessbase.com/ for some good quality reports. They also contain links to the official website.
Latest news : "Morozevich beats Kramnik, Anand leads" !!

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4153

And Kramnik scraped into 2nd place with a win in the last game. If only he had beaten Morozevich instead of losing ... there could have been some exciting tie break games.
It looks like Anand's official rating will go above 2800 now.

www.worldchesslive.com/uscf

ketchuplover: It seems rather expensive to me. Five bucks a month to play Chess online? And only Chess? What's the gimmick that'd hook me into that deal?

Kramnik - Anad 0-1

Walter Montego:

The offer is 6 months free.

Is the use of computers, to boost the level of one's play, approved at BrainKing?
http://main.uschess.org/assets/msa_joomla/MbrDtlMain.php?12495284

Chessvine.com is having a contest specifically for chess bloggers/writers ... check it out ...

http://chessvine.com/archives/31-Chessvine-Blogger-Contest.html

http://chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=4914

Anyone a big fan of either player?
They have both been a bit off form recently, I think.
So who will win?

Beren the 32nd: It will be an interesting match. I think Kramnik will win.

Please sign up -> 1500 ;), 10000 :D, 1600 ;) (single elimination for 8, Fisher's clock 3/0.8/15 with autopass & immediately start)
More informations about Fischer's clock on BrainKing & BrainRook

Chinise Chess - I need 2 players more
Japanese Chess - 1
Corner Chess - 5
Fortress Chess - 5
Horde Chess - 5
Loop Chess - 3
Anti Chess - 2
Extinction Chess - 4
Maharajah Chess - 5
Three Checks Chess - 3
Janus Chess - 5
Embassy Chess - 5
Screen Chess - 5
Crazy Screen Chess - 5
Cylinder Chess - 3
Amazon Chess - 4
Berolina Chess - 4
Fisher Random Chess - 3
Legan Chess - 5
Knight Relay Chess - 5
Grand Chess - 5
Capablanca Random Chess - 4
Los Alamos Chess - 5
Ambiguous Chess - 5
Minishogi - 5
Recycle Chess - 3
Ice Age Chess - 5
Cheshire Cat Chess - 5
Knighmate Chess - 4
& other games

Tuesday: That's as good a method as any, but watch it! You might find that you like the game, and then you're hooked for life. No patch or chessoholics anonymous will save you. Be warned!

Some chess database sites to view games:

http://www.chesslive.de/

http://www.chessgames.com/

http://www.chesslab.com/

Real-time and tournament replays:
http://www.monroi.com/


Enjoy.

Those interested in tournament chess in the US:

http://www.uschess.org/


Those interested world-wide

http://www.fide.com/

ughaibu: this site or any other site, they all said the same thing, using computer is prohibited, but they never do anything to stop it... i think it is unfair people using computer to win a game without telling his opponent, this is cheating. ...i suggest this site should add a big "c" to the nick of those player using computer....

435152: firstly, a 1400 rated chessplayer could not possibly know whether an opponent was making computer level moves.

secondly, how would computer cheaters be caught? by making good moves? What if the player you're playing is a world champion? How do you KNOW he's cheating?

I understand the frustration but humans still stand a chance against computers.

ColonelCrockett: your first statemene: 1400 rated chessplayer could not know computer level moves, this is a very stupid question. do you know?

your second statement also a stupid one. no world champion will come to this site, no GM , even a good player won't play here.

your last statement is not true, to day, computer beat human in chess, but not in GO or Chinese chess.

if your every move agree with the first choice of the computer program, you are using computer for sure.


the cheater's opponent did not know he is using computer, that is why i said it is unfair.

chess world champion won't be here for sure, but i know some times one ex-worldchamp will do it , his name is well known. Kaspraov, some thing like this, i can spell his name exactly.

a world champion no need to use computer when playing on line. he could win every game very easily.
but if a world champion using computer to play in the championship match and his opponent did not know, no one could take his title away, he can keep it forever.

today even in the very high level chess, such as the world championship match, the player is still complainng about computer cheating. have you heard about the "toiletgate"?

online rating is not a true rating, a 1400 could be a 2000+, a 2400 may be a 1600, who knows?

435152: I never said I could tell the difference between a person's good move and a computer's ... just that you couldn't.

You said "no world champion will come to this site, no GM , even a good player won't play here." ... this is plainly wrong ... masters play on any number of sites. Why wouldn't they play here?

lastly, computers don't beat humans consistently in chess. Winning a single game is not the same as beating an entire species. Any computer can beat my grandmother ... does that mean computers are better? The last organized matches between GMs and computers were gross mismatches (GM Jaan and GM Milov got their heads handed to them ... neither has been active in top chess)

Clandestine 1: "it speaks to their character." most definitely agreed!

One game which is so far impossible to cheat at is Jungle and the variant I co-created - Big Jungle. All computers play the game poorly and lose quickly to the best humans (as the best I can say that with confidence).

ColonelCrockett: This whole thing about not knowing what your opponent is doing when playing on the internet is why I like Dark Chess! The board is dark for everyone except the two players, so this makes getting outside help harder. The type of thinking needed to play it well is very hard for computer programmers. Though seeing how they've figured out Poker and Contract Bridge, I'd say this is not the case any more. Which leaves it to the fact that Dark Chess is under the programmer's radar for the time being and I can still beat the computers, few that play it that is. Them machines are getting smarter everyday. It's just a matter of time before they start thinking at their own direction and initiative. Then I'm sure self awareness will be right behind that day. Will it be Terminator 2 or something good for humanity? That's the question I think we'll face soon.

Walter Montego: I agree. I also think that what is true of dark chess is true of jungle ... under the radar.

ColonelCrockett: 1) first time you said that a 1400 rated chessplayer could not konw computer level moves. it sounds that a 1900 rated chessplayer like you could know. Now you said you never could tell the difference between human's moves and computer's .
2) you said masters play on any number of sites, master is not GM or World champion, who is the master playing at this site? don't tell me you are JUST a master

your last statement make me laugh, ha ha any computer can beat your grandmother. computer could beat you too......computer is better than human, computer won all the matches against human, not just by winning one single game. Is this not consistently? In your opinion computer must win all the games against human to be better? Again, don't tell me any GM won any Match today. GM could managed to win one game only....

when i click on the " Photo albums" then i see lots of public photos, some are animals as dog, cat, pig etc...i could't help laughing, once i hate to see a smiling face with dark glasses, now i just feel funny, i don't hate it any more.......any one @ this site is just a nick...any photo is just a mask.....

no World champion or GM will come to this site, even a good player won't play here.
why? the reason is very simple, there are no competition and prize.(money)...

435152: There was a guy here 2-3 years ago claiming to be Bobby Fischer. He didn't finish a sufficient number of games for us to judge one way or another, but he sure had a character nasty enough to fit the role... he got booted off the site for persistent rude behaviour. he played only Fisher random and Embassy - fitting the role too. Now, of course, we'll never know.

435152: 1) if a 1900 can't know if he's playing a computer ... what chance does a 1400 have? none.

2) Kasarov is most famous for publicly admitting to anonymously playing chess on the internet. big names like Karpov and Polgar have also done it.

You said: "computer won all the matches against human, not just by winning one single game" This is only a half truth. It is true that humans have been beaten in matches in the last several years. However, matches between computers and world champions have had by far more drawn games and are usually decided by one or two games.

It's becoming obvious to me that you are someone who knows quite a bit about Chinese Chess but almost nothing about Chess.

ColonelCrockett:a 1900 knows nothing about computer level moves same as a 1400...what is the point? the answer is still the same... that is... KNOW NOTHING ABOUT COMPUTER LEVEL MOVES.... what you trying to say is 1900 is better than 1400..ha ha ha..
i said "NO WORLD CHAMPION OR GM WILL COME TO THIS SITE." This site is brainking.com...do you know what i am talking about.?

to day, computer won all the matches against human, that is the fact. and you are talking about how many draws and loses of the match. what important is the result , that is ..who won?

you said i know nothing about chess, i know more than you know. one thing i want to point out that, this is a chess discussion board, any one can talk equally and freely. supposed you talk with a 2400 chess player who will say you know nothing about chess, what your chance knowing computer level moves? the answer is none...if a 2400 does not know. how could you know? ha ha ha.

as i said before, noline rating is not a true rating, a 1400 could be a 2000+, a 2400 may be a 1600...

rabbitoid: why you sent this message to me? i play only Chinese chess and sometimes Chess...i have never played Fisher Random and Ambassy...i don't understand those games.. i don't follow them...i don't play them...I don't understand why people play them.......

my rating is 1400 , it could be more.... my record is 8 wins, 1 draw and 9 loses......all my loses by run out of time ( 0. 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13 moves etc.. )....because i quit this site.then....

actully, i don't care about those online rating, i don't care about win or lose. i know where i am standing....ha ha ha. i will quit soon.....so far no one can beat me in chinese chess and chess....i know that.....

Long time ago, Kasparov played 3 matches vs the computer (big Blue or deep Blue by the IBM).. Kasparov was the world champion then, and he won the first match and lost the 2nd and the 3rd match.. The result is 2 to 1 , the machine won it. at that time human still stand a chance to beat the computer...but to day, human lost completely even Kasparov himself admitted human is no match to the fast machine

As I recall there was some suspicion that the computer was "aided" by human intevention when it one the first game.

ColonelCrockett: the chance to know if you are playing against a computer, nothing to do with your rating. this is my answer to your incorrect statement (1)
just tell me how much better chance for a 2000, 2100, 2200, 2300, 2400, ........than a 1900 like you.

Clandestine 1: yes, Kasparov has claimed that the computer was "aided" by human intervention after he lost the match.

435152: "you said i know nothing about chess, i know more than you know."

I fail to see how you've come to that conclusion. We've never played that I can remember. I have several open game slots if you'd like to put all your cards on the table. This discussion is over from my end (because when facts and logic are ignored discussion is pointless).

fact (1) a 1900 chessplayer could not know computer moves, and it can not know if it's opponent using computer program. The chance of knowing it a 1900 is not better than a 1400.
the reason is you don't know what your opponent is doing. no matter you are 1900 or 1400.

fact(2) No world champion or GM will come to this site, this site is brainking.com, a correspondence online playing site.
the reason is there are no competition and prize(money), and playing correspondence chess is very time consumeing, for a world champion or Gm, time is money.

fact (3) to day, computer won all the matches vs human
the reason, time is change, now is the computer era, the machine is so fast......himan is no match to the machine.

fact (4) GM is a short form for a Grand Master in chess, not a Grand Mother or General Motor or General Manager.
the reason is, GM could be anything if you are not talking about chess.

fact (5) i have said that no world champion or GM will come to this site, even a good player won't play here. I decide to quit this site, thanks to the Moderator that he did not ban me for what i have said.
the reason: I am a good chinese chess player, i found no competition here, and i hate to play this kind of correspondence game.

What does mean good player? There must be comparison. If you compare player 1500 and 2200, than 2200 is really good. I am pretty sure there is couple of very strong players (FIDE 2300+).

There is easy test how to find computer move. Use some good engine, like Rybka and let it play instead of player who would like to investigate. Of course you must compare more games than one.