I don't know the answer to Dan's question, but in the amazing game two, which Kramnik won, Topalov could have beaten him if only he'd noticed a crucial combination. People with computers could immediately see that Kramnik had made a mistake, but Topalov didn't find the winning moves. This kind of thing, missing winning or drawing lines, drives chess players at all levels absolutely crazy. It's also evidence that Kramnik isn't cheating in my opinion, if he's missing lines that save the day for him and only Topalov's mistakes are saving him. Here's a good article on game two -snip- *The second game between Veselin Topalov and Vladimir Kramnik was one of the most exciting games anyone has seen in years... http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3362 * On 9/28/06, Daniel Asimov <dasimov@earthlink.net> wrote:
Right now there is an ongoing chess championship, which (as followers of the sport will know) has been accepted by both major camps as the determiner of the next "world champion".
(The match is to be 12 games, and is played in Elista, located close to the middle of nowhere. After 4 games, Topalov has 1 point and Kramnik has 3 points -- 2 wins & 2 draws.)
Topalov has just signed a complaint saying that Kramnik is averaging 50 bathroom breaks per game -- and the private, players' bathroom is not monitored in any way. Topalov wants monitoring. (Cf. < http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/29/crosswords/chess/29chess.html >.) Evidently Topalov is concerned Kramnik may be accessing a chess computer for advice.
A.I. QUESTION: Is there a reasonable way, based on Kramnik's play in previous games, to distinguish moves that he conceived solely on his own from ones that are so brilliant that they were probably computer-aided ?
--Dan
_______________________________________________ math-fun mailing list math-fun@mailman.xmission.com http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/math-fun
-- Thane Plambeck tplambeck@gmail.com [*note new address*] http://www.plambeck.org/ehome.htm