|
|
Hi Vladimir
3/5/2010
|
Hi Vladimir. You are my idol. I've reviewed all of your games. You also lose the match, though not less. But even if your style is much liked. If you want a hard game we can. You can reach me by e-mail address below.
laskeron@yahoo.com |
Masoud Talebi
7/10/2009
|
Hi Mr.Kramnik. I'm a chess player and I'm a fan of your's. I am 14. I appreciate your brilliant plays and I follow them. Now I'm reading your book. Good Luck
a questioin : if you ever played in chessbase website? |
Ebomuche Cardinal
9/17/2008
|
According to GM Garry Kasparov, Vladimir Kramnik is the hardest player to beat in the world!!! one thing remains, Vladimir Kramnik has never lost in a match situation. And that is a record GM Kasparov cannot boast of!!! |
roozbeh r
9/1/2008
|
hi veladimir. how r u? i like your chess play.
ihave read your book about your chessplay life, and i enjoyed of it.i like your rating be 2800 up. |
samieizade , ehsan
6/25/2008
|
hello,happy birthday!!! |
Jessie
2/8/2008
|
If anyone is interested, Chessgames dot com
has (in the post board area) a link in where one may obtain the games of Edourd Nemeth. I believe he is German and has had great success at beating Chess Computers. I too recommend this link to Mr. Kramnik. Anyway, that is all, and take care---all of you! |
Wilmer Rey
12/19/2007
|
Why nobody plays chess against the computers like David Bronstein now, with 25 minutes against Deep Blue Jr. in 1994? |
richard moody jr.
8/20/2007
|
Punish the computer's tendency to use Classical chess evaluations instead of Universal chess evaluations (Look at former World Champion Kasparov's handling of the Sicilian against Short during their World Championship match for classic Universal positions. This is precisely the kind of position that humans will play well with Black and computers will play horribly on the White side of the variations).
Universal play is radically different from Classical chess. The key is to get a positional edge with Universal chess e.g. put Bishops on e8 and d8 for a very long time and walk your King to which ever side White castles; at precisely the right moment, switch to Classical chess and whipsaw the computer because it can't evaluate accurately two schools of chess at the same time. This is relatively trivial for humans, but impossible for computer programmers to achieve.
|
Eric Leonardo Rueda Correa
6/26/2007
|
Kramnik lost the match 4-2 but if we are honest this result dont reflex the quality of the games.
Kramnik play very good and lost the match simply because the blunder of the game 2 (with the checkmate) in a position euality or advantage in the queenside. After the game 3 Deep Fritz play best and Kramnik have problems and he is obbligated to win in the game 6 where deep fritz play very good. However I think that Kramnik play very good and a rematch will be interestant. |
Michel Roberto García Avilés
5/18/2007
|
Kramnik you are the best chessplayer in the world. Prepare carefully to september...
It's very difficult to defeat the computer today, but we most remenber that computers are created by the man... So, we are always better than they.
|
Brute force not the way to go
4/4/2007
|
btw i made the calculations of total moves the computer would have calculated, if it would be thinking since the beginning of live ages ago.
seriously, Brute force is not the way to go, but rather polishing out the algorythm searchs.
want an example?
RYBKA>> ALL |
total moves of anthony super PC
3/26/2007
|
lol actualy, if we assume that with the super hardware you described it plays at 100k million moves per second, and its calculating since the beginning of like, 4600 millions years ago we get this estimate
3600 seconds*24 hours = 86.400 secs per day
86400 seconds * 365 days/year = 31.536.000
31.536.000 * 4.600.000.000 years =
145.065.600.000.000.000 (total seconds since earth)
now those seconds multiplied by 100k millions of moves per second
14.506.650.000.000.000.000.000.000.000 this is a miniature number compared to total chess moves |
Alain
3/11/2007
|
The man vs machine chess matches should not be viewed as man vs machine, but rather as man vs a team of men and women who designed hardware and software to play chess. Therefore in the end its really man vs men. so it is only fare to have such matches be just like what the individual chess player has to play against a team. So I sugest that a team of Grand masters go against a team of designers. why not have 5 of the worlds top players work together against the machine, would this make it more fair and more realistic? |
Aaron P. Hofer
2/24/2007
|
Computers playing agianst humans in chess is turning into a situation where it isn't fair anymore. Computers, if they are to compete fair and square against a human should not be given the massive databases to refer to during the match, while the human only uses a handful of games in his/her memory bank, if that. In my opinion, computers and humans cannot compete with one another because of the vast different style that each one of them plays. Lets remove that feature from Deep Fritz, (it's database) and have it match wits against our Kramnik. Even it's sheer spee in calculation wouldn't be enough then. |
DJ69 - Chess Lover from the Lan
1/14/2007
|
Dear Mr.Kramnik, I don't understand why some people make big deal out of the result you had against Fritz. Actually you only lost few matches against a whole bunch of programmers, GMs who had been working behind it for years. In other words, it was NOT fair to start with anyway. If Fritz was made & programmed by a self-conscious computer itself, then it would be a different story. (Well... it would be rather quite serious, but it isn't the case.)
You are still our proud World Champion so please keep your head up. |
Anthony.R.Brown ( XBRAIN ) Prog
1/14/2007
|
To MACHINE!! (Computer 50% + Human 50%) Won!! |
MACHINE!!
1/10/2007
|
To don carter
01/01/2007 Sorry! I Won!! |
don carter
1/1/2007
|
Mr. Kramnik,
Machine or not, you're still the best in my opinion... |
Bytza
12/25/2006
|
Competing against Fritz, or any other such
non-human contraption, is no more playing
Chess than is splashing with an inflated
mermaid a honeymoon . . .
To my mind, computers threaten the art
(and the sport) of Chess. Do we have art
when "The Last Supper" is embossed on a
keyring, or sport if a rocket launches
a javelin?
|
Alejandro
12/19/2006
|
Im not even close to interested on a re-match oooh but i would love to watch Topalov Deep Fritz match and see him being squashed like the bug his become. How i would like to see Topalov play those f5 breakfast moves. My prediction 6-0 Deep Fritz favor. |
Anthony.R.Brown ( XBRAIN ) Prog
12/15/2006
|
To gooberbaby
14/12/2006 THE MAIN THING! IS THAT YOU HAVE LEARNT SOMETHING!.......................... |
gooberbaby
12/14/2006
|
To Anthony: you have been getting better about over-capitalization, but in your latest post you still have capitalized needlessly 'computer', 'draw', etc. So keep working on it.
|
CHIP@SILICON VALLEY
12/11/2006
|
To JUN SORIANO - Philippines
11/12/2006 You can go in the toilet as many times as you like? but it still would not help, when playing against the same Chess Program,if it was on a Super Mainframe Computer!! |
JUN SORIANO - Philippines
12/11/2006
|
THE BEST WAY TO BEAT A COMPUTER IS TO CHEAT. ANYWAY, WE HUMANS ARE GOOD AT IT. THE COMPUTER MAY NOT KNOW IT, BUT WE CAN SNEAK IN A TOILET AND USE ANOTHER COMPUTER TO BEAT HIM. |
Jeremy Williams
12/10/2006
|
Great effort vlad, and to come so close after just comming off arthritis rehab, and the controversial match with topalov, great try!
Xbrain. Blue Gene may work even better at 360 tf peak, but 280 normally. although i think it was made to do only certain types of calcs, so may not work. |