 |
| Home |
| Informations |
| Login |
| Register |
| Waiting lists |
| Membership |
| Hall of fame |
| Tournaments |
| Best game |
| Wikichess |
| Rating list |
| Problems |
| Forum |
| Links |
| Help |
| About |
|
Game result (chess) C. Koch, 2197 R. Kopytov, 2112 1-0 See game 24555 |
|
André Diamant wins Brazilian Chess Championship W. Utesch wins the 2nd FICGS candidates final Veselin Topalov wins Pearl Spring in Nanjing Miroshnichenko wins Ukrainian Championship 2008 Vassily Ivanchuk wins Benidorm tournament Armenia wins gold at 38th Chess Olympiad Deep Fritz 11 is available (Chessbase.com) Dominguez-Perez wins World Blitz Championship Hikaru Nakamura wins Cap d'Agde tournament Viswanathan Anand is FIDE world champion 2008 more chess news... |
|
Chi-Min Oh 7d wins London open Lee Sedol 9p beats Kang Dongyun in Korean Myeongin Kong Jie & Lee Sedol will play Samsung Cup final Crazy Stone wins Computer Go UEC Cup in Tokyo Fan Hui 2p wins Paris Meijin title more Go news... |
|
In the forum... Money games... Moneybookers, Paypal, credit card and bank transfer are available to play money games... Affiliate links... Win E-Points by linking to us as an affiliate, for each new member referred by your link, 1 E-Point will be added to your account... E-Points prizes... Ficgs now offers free games & tournaments with E-Points prizes... Rybka 3, Fritz 12... Rybka 3, Fritz 12, Hiarcs 13, your predictions on forthcoming chess engines... Translators... Translators are needed for chinese, japanese, indian, romanian, polish home pages... Vacation help... Hello all, I've entered a vacation time in error. Is it possible to cancel the vacation ? |
|
Last referers : YAHOO LIVE DAEMON-SEARCH |
|
Feel free to link to this page to get referer backlinks to your website ! |
Want your banner here ? |
There are 0 results for Philip in the games.
There are 45 results for Philip in the forum.
Thibault de Vassal (2007-03-14 17:00:55)
Elections in France :-)
A small thread about politics (could be interesting), just curious about what people from the whole world see and hear about elections in France, that will start in about 40 days from now.....
The news that Jacques Chirac will not try to be re-elected has been relayed everywhere, but what about the election itself ?
One more time opinion polls could influence the way people will vote and create a surprise at the end of the first "round"...
So just curious, who did you hear about among them : Nicolas Sarkozy, Ségolène Royal, François Bayrou, Jean-Marie Le Pen, Marie-George Buffet, Dominique Voynet, Olivier Besancenot, Arlette Laguiller, José Bové, Philippe de Villiers, Nicolas Dupont-Aignant, Frédéric Nihous ?
And last but not least, any predictions ? :-)
Thibault de Vassal (2007-04-30 14:05:46)
The meaning of Go for modern Russia
An interesting (as usual) article from IGN "Goama" newsletter - http://gogame.info
Alexander Rodin, the member of Go Federation
"The meaning of Go for modern Russia"
I'll try to state my thoughts about the meaning of the Go for modern Russia.
To begin with I suggested that we extrapolate Go models on the political and economical maps. These maps are very important as the spheres of social life, because the questions that are discussed at political and economical levels touch upon our lives, the lives of ordinary Russian citizens. In these spheres they continue the fierce struggle for life and death; in these spheres rivalry is especially keen and the made decisions define the vectors of our country development.
Let's imagine a situation if somebody inadequate came to power and set the totalitarian regime! Then all social "dissident" institution would start dying and so would do the Go Federation as a phenomenon which unifies people with independent thinking. Then it would be inevitable to start "hiding in basements" to keep the organization and set the secret addresses. Under conditions of modern Russia such kind of reasoning seems to be mostly fantastic than real. But if we look behind into our history we’ll remember that we have already had this phase of social development and know everything about it.
I am for that only "adequate" people, patriots, must hold power (I mean all its levels: federal, regional, local and busyness elite as well). These people must think independently and it would be just perfect if they were the people who both understand the very notion of strategy and use in their activity all the arsenal of strategic instruments and among them principles, stratagems and Go philosophy.
Someone can argue: "What are the patriots who set Japan draughts?" the heart of the problem is not in the fact that somebody sets draughts and even the Japan ones. The matter of fact is that there is a "pacific" model the centre of which is the idea of balance and peaceful division of the territory and influence. If someone of us can offer something better, so let him rule. In my opinion, it's the same as to rewrite the Bible or "The Treatise of Military Art" Soun Tsi.
The Go essence manifests in the state scale in the following aspects:
The first one is historical and cultural. The game has a great history and longstanding traditions. Go is no less than a civil game with the development of which hand by hand goes statehood making in many countries. Besides, it's followed by strengthening of spirituality and moral principles of society.
The second aspect is social. Go unifies people, sets friendly relationships between them. Through Go a man manifests quickly, through it s/he can see his/her reflection. Owing to "open spiritual fight" your adversary is likely to become your best friend without saying a word during a game.
The third aspect is pedagogical. Through Go they bring up the grown generations and form their active civil position. Like chess, Go forms and consolidates dynamical stereotypes showing in following behavioral models of people. Penetrating and consolidation happen imperceptibly when sleeping, during the junction of conscious and unconscious.
The fourth aspect is economical. Why are business people interested in Go? Because through the game model a man learns how to manage material and non-material resources. Via the game s/he realizes economical and management notions: market (territory), economical integration, SWOT-analysis (the analysis of weak and strong aspects) etc. Managers start realizing the importance of interconnection and interaction of structural subdivisions ensuring. These subdivisions shouldn't be isolated from each other. They should work time in time like a well-tuned tuning fork.
The fifth aspect is political. The idea of community in politics is as relevant as the idea of group of stones. When a group is weak there is always a possibility of dividing it and this is a sign for the whole group. When our country, being a federal union of equitable subjects, was going through its stage of making a number of subjects had a wish to use the weakness of this chain. So, in 1992 1994 for the first time after the collapsing of the USSR there appeared first separatist tendencies. E.Rossel, the governor of Sverdlovskaya region, A. Philipenko, the governor of HMAO, claimed about the possibility of Ural republic creation. The emissary of Chechen separatists Gokhar Dudaev proclaimed the independence of Chechen-Ingush republic. The detachment didn't happen but the country paid with blood for it. Nowadays we can see demonstration of political integration and isolation on the modern political world map. Take a strong unity of the European Union and states-outsiders: Democratic People's Republic of Korea and Iran.
In terms of remaining of the USA's striving for establishment of world hegemony (from V.V.Putin's speech at the recent Munich conference), Russia needs the processes of integration and consolidation with other countries aimed at its strengthening. The unified countries have a lot of dame. Now we can observe the stronger split in the CIS as a consequence of energetic and territorial policy of Russia that uses economical instruments of pressure upon "unfriendly and opposing" countries. Is it good or not? It's more likely that it‘s bad. But there are some positive tendencies: the role of the EurAsEC as a community which's built not on the basis of "strange brotherhood" and the role of Russia in it are increasing. Go is an ideological and spiritual base making us related to the countries of Asia-Pacific region. Go teaches how to see and distinguish creative and destroying processes.
The sixth aspect is psychological. The game develops thinking, in particular such processes as analysis and synthesis. It develops the ability of seeing the whole board and its details, the ability of seeing processes proceeding at global and local levels.
The seventh aspect is verbal and lexical or even philosophical. Through studying of the game theory we realize such categories as life and death, territory and influence, reliability, stability, the whole and the parts etc.
So, what is the Go meaning on the country scale? I assume that Go, as philosophy (an ideological and spiritual base), is a very important instrument of upbringing of strategic leaders, those who make decisions at high economical and political levels that influence the country's fate. Because in Go the idea of peaceful co-existence shows the way to harmony. The most pleasant is the fact the "Go way" doesn't have an end and there sky's the limit.
Wolfgang Utesch (2007-06-23 16:53:28)
Last try
180702 Humez, Philippe 28 2415 M i
Philip Roe (2007-08-21 00:19:50)
Best game voting
It is a nice new feature to be able to see all the board positions in a tournament. This inspired me to look through the "20 best games". On average a mediocre bunch! Perhaps the problem is the link "vote for best game" You look at this and wonder "What happens if I click on this?" and then discover that you have voted for the game you happened to be examining. I suggest a less ambiguous wording "Endorse this game as a best game candidate"
Philip Roe (2007-08-23 17:31:35)
draws and wins
Those statistics might have some curiosity value but perhaps not much deep meaning. Especially in the lower sections, all of the games defaulted in ten moves or fewer give a false impression of decisive play. Even if they are excluded, I feel sure that the proportion of draws is much higher for stronger players, so I dont know what an average percentage would tell us.
Philip Roe (2007-08-28 22:52:27)
Quotes
Work expands to fill the time available (C. Northcote Parkinson, in Parkinsons Laws)
Philip Roe (2007-09-01 04:24:39)
private/public messages
I too would like to send private messages, perhaps to congratulate the winner of my tourney. Also, can one add public comments to a game that is finished? Either ones own game or someone elses?
Philip Roe (2007-09-01 20:04:25)
engine-free chess
When I started playing here about three months ago I did not realise that engine use was allowed (or even encouraged, according to some) What did attract me were some features like being able to see ongoing games of other players, which makes the experience more like a "real" OTB event. I have played on other sites (IECG,ICC) where engines are forbidden, and ICC at least claims to have software that detects cheating. I play without an engine (but using books)simply because I enjoy it more. I dont care all that much what you do as long as you play interesting moves. It seems very clear from the games that lower-rated players certainly dont use engines and higher-rated players probably have to. At my kind of level (1900ish) it seems optional, but the suspicion that my opponent analyses with an engine steers me away from certain types of position (speculative sacs, or clear strategy but complex tactics) which is a shame because that may be where the position wants to go. The previous thread got very heated, and Im not sure why. One suggestion was to let non-computer users go away and play funny little unrated games by themselves. That is not attractive. Im not interested in playing walkover games against weak opponents. Rating is essential. Other than that, Im very interested to find out what other people think. That will determine whether or not I come to feel at home here.
Philip Roe (2007-09-01 22:01:21)
quotes
As the days dwindle down.. to a precious few...(Maxwell Anderson, September Song.. or any CC-player)
Christophe Czekaj (2007-09-03 12:53:52)
no chess engines
Hello Thibault, I play here without chess engine. Anyway, recently I tried to play "hippopotamus defence", (with no good result yet, I have to admit) so a computer is no use, it doesn't understand anything, but perhaps it's hippopotamus which is wrong, not the computer ;-D. Anyway a difficult defence in correspondence play). I began on this site with 2000, and so my elo was too high to play against human only ? I don't see how it's possible a sofware detect computer use ? Ok we see strange, computer-like moves sometimes, but... Perhaps two players, at the beginning of the game can agree to not use computer. Again about chess engine, I use a computer to record the moves (chessbase),to gain time, and replay fast the moves to get to the actual position, but my chess engines (an old fritz (5) and chess tiger (14) all that on a old PC) would certainly suffer a lot use against more recent chess engines ;-D Like Philip, I like to play on ficgs and it would be nice to plmay against more human opponent. I play one tournament on itsyourturn since last year, and I saw a lot more human mistakes than on ficgs. So, how explain it, I sometimes feel more comfortable on itsyourturn, but still I do like the spirit of ficgs, match against RU, the tournaments, forum, nice people to meet on the board, and so on
Philip Roe (2007-09-03 18:59:27)
CC without engines
Thibault, Christophe, All I did was to pass on that ICC CLAIMS to be able detect computer use. They dont say how they do it. Maybe they are just bluffing, or maybe they have an algorithm that kind of works and they dont want people to work around it by knowing how it works. The reason I dont use engines is because I want to take full credit for any wins I get. I can imagine using an engine and telling myself that I will just use it to prevent oversights. But I cant control what the engine will tell me. It might recommend a move that tells me that I am planning to attack the wrong target. If I then switch plans and win, what is left for me to feel proud of? But I can understand that others may feel differently, and there is much to be said for a site where everything is allowed because it gets around the issue of making a rule that is certainly very hard to enforce. But just because that rule does not exist on FICGS, it seems to me that if somebody on FICGS says that they are not using an engine, then you can probably believe them. The problem with other sites is that if a player with an umimpressive rating fires back a series of accurate moves very quickly in a difficult situation then you suspect that he is using an engine (although he promised not to) and there is not much you can do about it. If the same thing happens on FICGS you are pretty sure that he is using an engine, but you have already agreed that he can, so it doesnt irritate you. For that reason, I think that a computers-barred tournament might actually make sense on FICGS because those who want to use engines can legitimately do so. But for me, it would need to be chess that means something, with at least rating points at stake. Interestingly, Christophe and I are drawn in the same tournament, so we can declare at least that one game computer-free!
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-03 23:52:20)
CC without engines
Philip, that's a good point, I'll create the new category tomorrow anyway.
I hope we will see beautiful and imaginative games there :)
Philip Roe (2007-09-05 23:13:44)
CC without engines
Well, you learn something new every day.
About paragraphing anyway!
Garvin, dont give it a second thought. Christophe and myself have both said that we accept your use of engines: we signed up for it.
Jason, I'm sure I speak for Christophe in saying that neither of wants to change anything for you happy centaurs. All we said was that IF enough other people felt the same way, THEN maybe Thibault might add that feature to his excellent site.
The parallel thread on tablebases is interesting. I find myself taking the opposite view. I dont see them as being very different from looking up KBNk in a textbook. They dont take fun out of the game because most of those rare positions are so impenetrable that they are not much fun anyway.
So I am not very consistent in my views. Who was it said that consistency is the hobgoblin of small minds?
Philip Roe (2007-09-06 13:55:03)
Jason
[moderator : is it worth to respond and add to the provocation ? :)]
Jason Repa (2007-09-06 20:56:31)
Philip Roe
You're joking here right? I made a benign and topical post trying to explain things for some people. I attacked or provoked NOBODY. You started in on me with this "for you happy centaur" remark that was completely uncalled for and unsolicited.
I can't seem to win with the forum here. Even when I make an innocent post I get insulted and harassed. Then when I defend myself the Admin sides against me like clockwork, lol.
Christophe Czekaj (2007-09-07 12:44:20)
To Jason
Hello Jason ! It’s just a question to have the possibility to play correspondence chess (for fun, not neccesarily studying or analysis, just the pleasure of finding moves, ideas (you know, what Bronstein called imagination) not rating, not to be classified as expert, or I don’t know what…) with people without computer. If they lie and use computer ; OK, we can’t be sure, but I’m certain you could accept that some players can trust other players when they say they don’t use computers. For example, I trust Philip when he said this, it’s just a question of being a gentleman. If there are cheaters ok, so what… Rybka will win And I don’t undestand your topic about class of players : I hope I‘ve the right of posting some commentaries on this forum, despite the fact being largely behind you in term of rating… I think we can still play chess without computer, and with rating or not, it’s the same game for me. Philip and I just think it could be kind to play with other players with a kind of gentleman’s agreement. Sorry if it bother you
Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-08 12:56:34)
No engines tournaments
Jason, of course you may be right ! .. We'll see, but I think the experience may be interesting anyway. As Philip said, FICGS main tournaments are designed for centaurs, and basically these "no engines" unrated tournaments are really just for fun... Unlike some of the other sites you mentioned, where to be ranked 1st may incite to use chess engines, I feel that these tournaments (with no rating ranges) will not attract many centaurs, simply because there's no interest at all for them...
Philip Roe (2007-09-11 03:59:50)
Netiquette
Thibault,
Your proposal is good. You should not have to make decisions about who "started" an altercation, because sometimes it will be a close call. The only way to avoid making the close calls is to decline to make any calls.
Philip Roe (2007-09-13 00:37:23)
Andrew Stephenson
You post makes a lot of sense, and I can absolutely agree that being a centaur can be fun and educational (Centaurs in Greek mythology, by the way, were a highly respected race, and usually described as happy) However, I am puzzled by something which maybe you or someone else can explain.
You and others assert that playing the engines first choice every time will drop points against an intelligent centaur. Does it not follow that a centaur should have a higher rating than its engine? But in fact the ratings quoted for the top engines are substantially higher than the ratings of anyone on FICGS, which seems a paradox.
Does the explanation lie in unsynchronized rating systems, or am I just missing something? This question has nothing to do with value judgements, merely with satisfying a curiosity.
Philip Roe (2007-09-14 17:53:56)
Andrew Stephenson
Thanks for your explanations. They were helpful. Let me try to say what I meant by unsynchronised rating systems (maybe I could have found a better word)
The difference between your rating and mine is a measure of how likely you are to beat me, and that relationship between rating difference and percentage score is similar for any system I have come across.
However, the absolute numbers mean little if anything. There was a widespead belief for some time that US players were overrated, even though the system worked fine internally. My understanding is that from time to time organisations check to see if they have drifted too far from FIDE standards.
This sort of calibration works fine for human OTB games, but for anything else it is not easy to see how to "set the zero", and that possible mismatch is what I called "unsynchronised".
I think that standard CC practice is to try to give each player a rating similar to their OTB rating. I do not know how the engine ratings quoted were tied down, and I imagine that centaur ratings are very difficult to calibrate.
Philip Roe (2007-10-15 16:56:55)
Chess 960 masterpieces
Have there been any games of chess 960 played, of a quality that would justify them being included in an anthology of great games? If so, I would like to see some.
Philip Roe (2007-10-18 00:40:41)
Feynman on Go
In a 1985 lecture, Nobel laureate Richard Feynman said that creating an expert program for Go would be a scientific project of very high importance. His reason was that he did not believe that it could done by brute force, and that it would therefore compel researchers to grapple with the problem of just how human beings manage to do what they do with seemingly meager processing power.
Of course brute force has come a long way in 20 years, but my impression is that virtually no progress has been made of the kind that Feynman hoped to see. Does anyone know otherwise?
Don Groves (2007-10-18 04:40:54)
Feynman on Go
Hi, Philip -- I don't know of any specific details on that sort of progress but Richard Feynman was one of my heroes. I was blessed to get to attend a lecture of his on a field trip to Caltech for high school math and science seniors and have never forgotten the experience.
Philip Roe (2007-11-11 19:16:42)
cui bono?
Thibault,
I'm not at all clear what your proposal is intended to achieve.
Are you trying to save us from ourselves? Ruined careers, failed marriages, social withdrawal, vitamin deficiency...? If so I can't imagine a one-size-fits-all solution.
Or are you protecting other players from the phenomenon of a player who takes on a large number of games and then, for whatever reason, forfeits many of them? This seems to happen regrettably often and for that purpose it seems perfectly reasonable to ask people to qualify before managing a large number of games. Can you pull any statistics that might be revealing?
Thibault de Vassal (2007-11-11 19:33:21)
Save our souls :)
Hi Philip... No, the aim is not exactly to save carriers, marriages or whatever, but it may help in some cases :)
The main problem is to see general forfeits from serious players who were playing 60, 80 or more games.. I have no statistics but I see every game result, so it is quite obvious to me when a player forfeits all his ongoing games. So in a way, I'd like to protect everyone, players and their opponents, from this.
Philip Roe (2007-12-02 01:01:39)
I think this is original
Chess, like love, like music, has the power to make men miserable.
Philip Roe (2008-01-11 20:49:15)
game search
At present the "search games" facility allows to search by player's name or by opening. It might be convenient also to be able to search by game number. For example when a particular game is mentioned in the forum by number.
Philip Roe (2008-01-17 03:05:06)
Excellent enhancements
Thibault,
Many thanks for the work you put into this!
I have one minor complaint. I think it is very unlikely that I will ever want to respond to any of the displayed challenges, so for me that is just clutter. Is there way to opt out of having this feature displayed?
Thibault de Vassal (2008-01-17 04:10:04)
Challenges option
Hi Philip and Don, yes of course I have to add this option. A few more days or weeks, and it will appear in preferences, that's written on my sheet anyway ;)
Philip Roe (2008-01-18 23:09:34)
congratulations
to Gaetano for what is surely our only 2-0 score
Gaetano Laghetti (2008-01-22 09:00:36)
congratulations
Dear Philip, it is very kind of you. Thank you also to Thibault for giving me the chance to play in this match. Ciao Gaetano
Philip Roe (2008-02-09 18:01:20)
Moving advertisements
Thibault,
I understand your need to generate revenue, and I may be the only one to feel this way, but I find it very irritating to have advertisements displayed that employ dynamic graphics.
They are, of course, designed to be eyecatching, and I find that they make it almost impossible to focus on the analysis board, which was a very welcome recent innovation.
Philip Roe (2008-02-09 21:28:14)
Simple fix
Or, as I realised about ten seconds after posting, I can just maximise the analysis window to hide the ads...
Philip Roe (2008-02-15 18:48:06)
Current WC
Sorry, Iouri, but you are wrong.
But even if you were correct, your comment would be wrong (IMO of course)
Iouri Basiliev (2008-02-16 00:16:43)
2 Philip
Sorry Philip, but it's MY opinion. Kramnik got his title when he won WC match against Garry. Nobody got it from him. It was "No rematch" and Leko was not a legitime pretendent. So unfortunately.
Philip Roe (2008-07-23 20:42:20)
poems against humanity
Normajean,
I cant recall the ending either, but in a similar vein,
My fellow man I do not care for
I often ask me whats he there for
The only answer I can find
Is reproduction of his kind.
Normajean Yates (2008-07-24 00:38:58)
Mark, where is your sensayuma?:)
Get a sense of divers humour, man!
Philip, :) [same thing, more seriously, but not only about humans - Dawkins's 'Selfish Genes' presentation of [neo-]Darwin?] Dawkins is, or rather used to be, interesting - but not half as funny as Philip's contribution is :D
PS: I am lesbian, so the likes of me would have mightily puzzled whoever wrote that poem :) :)
Philip Roe (2008-07-27 03:39:07)
Notation
There is a history of chess notation at
http://www.excaliburelectronics.com/history0799.html
crediting algebraic notation to Philip Stamma in 1737 and stating that "by the 19th century Stamma's simple system had become the norm in some European countries".
So if Breyer did make the remark attributed to him it would probably have read something like "after Nf3..." bur with N replaced by the symbol for Knight in whatever language he was using.
Descartes of course, invented algebraic geometry, in which a straight line is represented by
ax+by=c
and so on.
Normajean Yates (2008-07-27 20:28:23)
adding to Philip Roe 's post...
It is funny that high-school algebraic geometry is more often called analytic geometry; while in algebraic geometry, 'analytic geometry' is the branch that deals with power series in general rather than polynomials ... so what in analytic (power-series) geometry corresponds to Bezout's theorem? (I have no idea...)
Philip Roe (2008-08-11 16:25:09)
Pie in the Sky
Getting free annotations from a strong player seems a bit much to expect.
If you belong to the Internet Chess Club, and type help Services, you get a list of people willing to teach lessons or annotate games. They all charge by the hour, depending on their strength and economic situation. An IM from a third world country charges about $20 per hour. I doubt that you can do better.
Philip Roe (2008-10-31 13:24:41)
Chess extensions
There seem to be many ways to extend chess. Most proposals, like yours Normajean, combine the powers of existing pieces. There may be other ways.
I saw it pointed out somewhere that if you put a piece somewhere near the middle of the board, at the center of a 5x5 patch of squares ,the N can go to any square in the patch not covered by a R or B. It was suggested that this might have been the reasoning of the original inventor. This makes even more sense if you consider that under medieval rules the K+Q covered a 3x3 patch.
Along these lines, consider a 7x7 patch and let the new piece go to any square not covered by an existing piece. Such a piece might be interesting. It would cover up to 16 pieces and be a formidable long-range weapon, but perhaps rather helpless at close quarters.
In designing an initial position, I would want to take into account the possibility of early interactions. In regular chess the placing makes such possibilities as the pinning of Nc3 by Bb4 possible. Proponents of FischerRandom call this kind of thing hackneyed, but I find most FR positions sterile because the game has no initial shape.
Normajean Yates (2008-10-31 22:52:08)
I love [16x16] bigchess! :)
But disclosure of bias: I am winning my first bigchess (16x16) tournament 6-0 I think ;)
[4-0 I have already, One opp is timing out, and the only remaining opp: well see game 23201... ]
Let me be clear, 16x16 is very nice, need 'far' sight in two senses of the word :), and I would still love it - even if I was losing!
If some genie gave me the option that 'okay, from tomorrow at ficgs there will be no bigchess but there will be 5x5 and 10x10 and Philip Roe's generalisation to 7x7 with a nice initial position worked out -
I'd say no! I want bigchess!
Normajean Yates (2008-10-31 23:07:40)
small correction + apology to philip..
When I mistakenly said Philip Roe's 7x7 chess -- I meant just what Philip meant - i.e. some variant (10x10?) with two of those pices which can move only to those squares of the 7x7 patch they are at the centre of where it couldn't move were it a 'normal' chess piece. Sorry for the mistake.. and for the correct but perhaps obfuscating expression of the concept in *this* post ... [I took Roe's clear prose and ran an obfuscator on it ;)]
Philip Roe (2008-12-11 14:08:02)
Seems it can go either way..
I have played chess with a world champion poker player. He is an above-average chessplayer, but just a US master.
Philip Roe (2008-12-11 15:32:43)
Interesting for sure..
Impressive, not so much.
He seems to make a big distinction between conscious and unconscious thought with no real justification. The fact that electrical activity can be detected prior to awareness does not tell us much. Daniel Dennett's "Consciousness Explained" is the most satisfactory account that I have read, and his "multiple drafts" theory is not unlike Runes, except that it allows for a more sophisticated interaction. Roughly, the conscious mind sets goals "I want to attack on the k-side" and the subconscious suggests means "How about Qh5" which the conscious rejects or selects for further review by setting a new goal " Lets see if Qh5 works". By ignoring this interplay Rune creates difficulties from which he cannot extricate himself. And Dennett also asks himself much tougher questions like "why is there consciousness at all? What evolutionary purpose could it serve?"
Interestingly, the subconscious seldom suggests really silly ideas, like Qh5 if there is a pawn on g6 and nothing else going on. Indeed, the filtering out of "non-candidates" can be quite impressive. I recall a moment from the BBC TV series The Master Game. Bill Hartston, an IM and a psychologist, was momentarily taken aback by an unexpected move made by his (weaker) opponent. "Why didn't I see that?" A few seconds later "Oh, that's why I didn't see it!" (the move involved an unsound combination) Hartston was about to coauthor a book on chess psychology with John Wason, and his remark was not entirely in jest.
Hartston was suggesting, by his remarks, that he could usually trust his unconscious not to show him anything irrelevant. That, to my mind, is one of the things that characterizes a strong player. The irrelevant moves just don't occur to them.
So then what about blunders? Well, the system is very fallible. It IS just made of meat, and the real surprise is that blunders do not occur more often. But the blunders made by strong players seem different from the blunders made by rabbits. They are usually relevant to something, but they have a hole in them. I dont see anything at all about Runes proposals that would eliminate blunders, except through the indirect route of making you a stronger player.
There are 2 results for Philip in wikichess.
Philip Roe (1950)
e4 e5 f4 d5 exd5 exf4
transposing back to accepting the gambit
============
Contributors : Philip Roe
... or search for Philip in FICGS via Google
[Chess rating list]
[Go ranking list]
[Chess & Go links]
[Chess forum]
[Players blog]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Encyclopedia] [Seo forums] [Discussions] [Buzz] [Meet people] [Directory] [Contact] [Legal informations]
[Encyclopedia] [Seo forums] [Discussions] [Buzz] [Meet people] [Directory] [Contact] [Legal informations]
