29-05-2013, 12:31 AM
Walter, the round 2 game was removed because of time pressure issues, that game went on for 118 moves, and without actually witnessing the game for myself, i couldn't say to what extent those time pressures affected his play. It is likely that his accomplice's computer wouldn't calculate to a similar depth as in other games, and hence he made the same mistakes as Houdini 3 in that game.
I'm not aware of GM Jovanovic making any comment about that game (professional courtesy?), but i would hazard a guess (and a small wager) that he was on to him right from the start. The closed position and minor piece endgame are both known to be weaknesses in engines, even the best ones. You're a much stronger player than i am, you'll know this more than me.
I remember reading the Chessbase interview a while back, i think it was actually conducted by WhyChess magazine. It was clearly an interview designed to lead him up the garden path. His comments about beating Houdini 10-0 were laughable, especially when he plays the same moves.
I had said earlier in the forum post from where i copy/pasted the above post, (Lilov's Chess.com blog) that if he wasn't banned, i feared that TDs would have a dilemma whether to accept his entry, and that i hoped we never got to the stage where his opponents refused to play him, or people withdrew from tournaments where he had entered. Andrew Burnett's comments above are not unique, many players have stated that they would also refuse to play him. I don't know if this is the reason why the Bulgarian Chess Federation have now acted. I should clarify though that this is a 4 month disqualification, one can only presume that they are to further investigate...
The comparison with Carlsen's performance at Tata (where he dished out a royal whooping to a top class field!) is merely to illustrate to people who have no experience of what percentage of match up is likely from a strong player. It wasn't intended to be the most accurate of comparisons. I do agree that a fairer comparison would be with players of a similar strength, but players of that strength do make mistakes, or less accurate moves, and also miss technical points that a Master would recognise. The gap between Ivanov's performance to that of someone of a similar strength would be even larger.
IMHO there is no need for 100% certainty. Some people are arguing this point, some others are arguing "beyond reasonable doubt", and some others are suggesting "on the balance of probabilities". All are standards set by different types of court. Andrew McHarg mentions DNA evidence in court. A match up rate as high as Ivanov's in this tournament is at least as good as DNA probabilities so far as i am concerned, leading me to believe beyond reasonable doubt that his moves were indeed made by Houdini 3.
There are only 2 questions left to be answered, who his accomplice was and how the moves were transmitted between them. Someone has even suggested X-raying his skull!
I'm not aware of GM Jovanovic making any comment about that game (professional courtesy?), but i would hazard a guess (and a small wager) that he was on to him right from the start. The closed position and minor piece endgame are both known to be weaknesses in engines, even the best ones. You're a much stronger player than i am, you'll know this more than me.
I remember reading the Chessbase interview a while back, i think it was actually conducted by WhyChess magazine. It was clearly an interview designed to lead him up the garden path. His comments about beating Houdini 10-0 were laughable, especially when he plays the same moves.
I had said earlier in the forum post from where i copy/pasted the above post, (Lilov's Chess.com blog) that if he wasn't banned, i feared that TDs would have a dilemma whether to accept his entry, and that i hoped we never got to the stage where his opponents refused to play him, or people withdrew from tournaments where he had entered. Andrew Burnett's comments above are not unique, many players have stated that they would also refuse to play him. I don't know if this is the reason why the Bulgarian Chess Federation have now acted. I should clarify though that this is a 4 month disqualification, one can only presume that they are to further investigate...
The comparison with Carlsen's performance at Tata (where he dished out a royal whooping to a top class field!) is merely to illustrate to people who have no experience of what percentage of match up is likely from a strong player. It wasn't intended to be the most accurate of comparisons. I do agree that a fairer comparison would be with players of a similar strength, but players of that strength do make mistakes, or less accurate moves, and also miss technical points that a Master would recognise. The gap between Ivanov's performance to that of someone of a similar strength would be even larger.
IMHO there is no need for 100% certainty. Some people are arguing this point, some others are arguing "beyond reasonable doubt", and some others are suggesting "on the balance of probabilities". All are standards set by different types of court. Andrew McHarg mentions DNA evidence in court. A match up rate as high as Ivanov's in this tournament is at least as good as DNA probabilities so far as i am concerned, leading me to believe beyond reasonable doubt that his moves were indeed made by Houdini 3.
There are only 2 questions left to be answered, who his accomplice was and how the moves were transmitted between them. Someone has even suggested X-raying his skull!