[CHESS] FIDE Candidates Chess Tournament 2022

[South Park]

this is the point
AI will take the mathematical and logical approach
and some things are beyond this domain
bluffing is one of them
even though AI can calculate the odds of determined combination of cards being the winner, top poker players can also do it
winning on poker is not about it, it's way more

totally different game than chess
makes sense?

While it is difficult to guess exactly how an AI can bluff we can look at how humans do it to give ourselves an idea of how it may be done, for example in a book about small stakes poker a technique that is recommended for newbies on the game to bluff from time to time is extremely simple, before you begin to play you select a few cards at random from the deck, if you have the impression your opponent has you beat but they do not have the nuts and you see one of the cards you selected beforehand on the community cards then you bluff, this system is extremely simplistic but it helps newbies by forcing them to bluff from time to time and make their playing style more aggressive and unpredictable, so I think that an AI has a more advanced series of rules which allows it to make a far better use of the bluff.

got curious about it and went to search and seems like you're right

Researchers reveal how poker playing AI beat the best human players
AI just beat the world’s 4 best poker players: What it means

seems like there's no hope for humans when playing against the machines

what games are next?
do you think AI robots will be able to beat humans on complex sports?

That is what comes next, for a long time there has been a world championship soccer for robots, and even if right now they do not compare to the abilities that humans possess we know the same was true when people decided that they wanted a computer to play chess at the level of a champion, and now look at us, computers are now way better than humans at chess, so it is only a matter of time until robots can outperform humans at most sports, at this point the only advantage that humans have is that we are extremely flexible, even if we cannot beat a specific artificial intelligence at chess we will be able to beat it at almost anything else, however what will happen when an artificial intelligence appears which is as flexible as we are but it retains the ability of computers to calculate at an amazing speed? That is the realm of science fiction and it will be impossible at that point to know what will happen.

[Lucasgabd]

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

[LUCKMCFLY]

Has anyone noticed on YouTube that Carlsen is advertising some kind of casino? I don't remember the name, but I do remember the slogan "Zero Risk Gambling" hahaha. Judging by his participation in poker competitions and this advertisement, it can be assumed that he is increasingly immersed in the world of gambling. Is this just making money interesting or is he seriously interested in this area? I hope this is a passing fad, I would like to see him in the next cycles of the Candidates Tournament.

I have not seen this but there could be some very deep reasons for this new interest in gambling, I have seen chess go from humans being better than computers, then being evenly matched to a complete dominance of computers over humans, poker due to its nature is still a game in which humans are better than computers and most likely this will remain the case until very smart AI is developed, maybe Carlsen is frustrated with the fact that even if he is the best human chess player he cannot beat his digital opponents, and he would like to try poker as it is a game in which he could reach the true top, but this is speculation on my part.

The truth is that this really catches my attention, the fact that Carlsen leans towards games of chance is a reason that he can combine his intelligence for chess and apply it to the game, I don't think it's bad, of course this is mere speculation, but at Seeing Carlsen's level I don't think he gets into areas where he can lose easily and more so if it's about money, could he have discovered certain patterns in gamling and want to try? It would be crazy if he could do such a thing, but it is never ruled out, in any case the master moves he makes in chess are unique and worth highlighting, and it is most likely that he will use all that for gamblig.

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

That will be very interesting, but let's not be surprised the day these things are seen normally, now things in chess can happen in different ways, there is already artificial intelligence, I don't know if there is still the ajederez21.com page, something like that, there They calculated the rank of each one, but I have my doubts, I think there were already bots playing chess there, because there was a group of people who played like masters, there were some blitzes that I played, 3 minutes long and wow that was impressive.

Now I am looking for a good platform to find a way to play but other than playing with bots, I would like a good online tournament.

[Boristhecat]

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

Art is too subjective, but if we are talking about juggling, movement, etc., then in any factory, the machines show a grace and precision that is inaccessible to a person, haha.

When it comes to fine arts, neural networks have already reached an incredible level, here is a recent news: This AI-Generated Artwork Won 1st Place At Fine Arts Contest And Enraged Artists
I looked at a lot of pictures created by the Migjorney neural network and this is real art. It is obvious that in a few years it will be much stronger than any human artist, even if forced to draw pictures physically.

[Lucasgabd]

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

Art is too subjective, but if we are talking about juggling, movement, etc., then in any factory, the machines show a grace and precision that is inaccessible to a person, haha.

When it comes to fine arts, neural networks have already reached an incredible level, here is a recent news: This AI-Generated Artwork Won 1st Place At Fine Arts Contest And Enraged Artists
I looked at a lot of pictures created by the Migjorney neural network and this is real art. It is obvious that in a few years it will be much stronger than any human artist, even if forced to draw pictures physically.

well, you are right, but machines are usually good at predictable movement, not original creative surprising things
I'm talking about organic movement, think Ido Portal stuff, fighting monkey, I don't think we'll see machines doing this kind of thing any time soon
but maybe...

I agree that midjourney is real art and has beautiful creations
it won't substitute human artists but both will coexist

[virasisog]

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

Art is too subjective, but if we are talking about juggling, movement, etc., then in any factory, the machines show a grace and precision that is inaccessible to a person, haha.

When it comes to fine arts, neural networks have already reached an incredible level, here is a recent news: This AI-Generated Artwork Won 1st Place At Fine Arts Contest And Enraged Artists
I looked at a lot of pictures created by the Migjorney neural network and this is real art. It is obvious that in a few years it will be much stronger than any human artist, even if forced to draw pictures physically.

well, you are right, but machines are usually good at predictable movement, not original creative surprising things
I'm talking about organic movement, think Ido Portal stuff, fighting monkey, I don't think we'll see machines doing this kind of thing any time soon
but maybe...

I agree that midjourney is a real art and has beautiful creations
it won't substitute human artists but both will coexist

The things that the latest technology can create are too unpredictable. Who would have thought that the latest machines that we have right now would be available? We shouldn't limit the capability of the technology because everything could actually be imitated nowadays. Machines are now replacing human functions so I'm sure that they can create human-like figures with almost the same movement in the future.

[dothebeats]

<...>

Not to burst your bubble or anything, but chess GMs have one thing different from other normal chess players like us- they are genetically born with it.

Imagine, Magnus Carlsen at a very young age can calculate lines in his head blindfolded. I remember watching a chess video where Magnus was able to defeat more than 10 players simultaneously blindfolded in an exhibition match. Even if we do train for 24-hours a day, which is seemingly impossible, I really doubt that we will be able to reach the height of these super GMs in the chess field.

Like what you also mentioned, Magnus does not have to prove anything to the chess world. He is undoubtedly, the best chess player in history especially in the era of chess engines.

They do more than that. GMs have photographic memory of moves and remember most of the games they played or watched. This was proven by many of them at the quiz where they were shown a board and asked which game it is and they were able to say who played each side.


As for playing blindfolded, there's such a gap between a master and a grand master that it always surprises me. Hikaru Nakamura is known for playing blindfolded and I saw him win against international masters this way. It's amazing how some people are able to perfect their play style.

A lot of GMs do possess an insane photographic memory. Hikaru is a great example on his streams when he's just reviewing chess games. Magnus is also one but he rarely uses the lines that were previously played by other chess GMs. He tries to deviate from those lines that catches his opponents off-guard and just beautifully create new lines on his games. This is Magnus' genius: he thinks like a chess AI with extreme depth that he can think of some crazy moves that even engines cannot even detect.

[Boristhecat]

Weird news from Magnus Carlsen, who withdrew from the tournament he took part in yesterday:

I've withdrawn from the tournament. I've always enjoyed playing in the
@STLChessClub, and hope to be back in the future

source

It looks especially strange against the background of Mourinho's quote that he attached to the message. Hopefully later we will find out what all this means, but it is clear to me that Carlsen is moving further and further away from chess. Sad.

[ChiBitCTy]

I don’t personally watch chess very often, but I have watched a few YouTube clips of Magnus Carlson and of course have watched some of the old stuff with Bobby Fischer.  I just read how Magnus walked out of this recent tournament but does anyone know why exactly? Looks like his tweets are a bit cryptic in his reasoning for doing so.

[Lucasgabd]

I'm curious to see the point where robots can create artist stuff with their bodies (think dance, juggling and performance arts/expression) in a way that is cooler than with humans
maybe one day we'll go watch a play with only robots on the casting
that's gonna be curious

Art is too subjective, but if we are talking about juggling, movement, etc., then in any factory, the machines show a grace and precision that is inaccessible to a person, haha.

When it comes to fine arts, neural networks have already reached an incredible level, here is a recent news: This AI-Generated Artwork Won 1st Place At Fine Arts Contest And Enraged Artists
I looked at a lot of pictures created by the Migjorney neural network and this is real art. It is obvious that in a few years it will be much stronger than any human artist, even if forced to draw pictures physically.

well, you are right, but machines are usually good at predictable movement, not original creative surprising things
I'm talking about organic movement, think Ido Portal stuff, fighting monkey, I don't think we'll see machines doing this kind of thing any time soon
but maybe...

I agree that midjourney is a real art and has beautiful creations
it won't substitute human artists but both will coexist

The things that the latest technology can create are too unpredictable. Who would have thought that the latest machines that we have right now would be available? We shouldn't limit the capability of the technology because everything could actually be imitated nowadays. Machines are now replacing human functions so I'm sure that they can create human-like figures with almost the same movement in the future.

yes, we are creating surprising and unexpected things everyday
Dall-E/Midjourney and these new prompt to image engines shows us that a lot of things will be possible

we'll see

A lot of GMs do possess an insane photographic memory. Hikaru is a great example on his streams when he's just reviewing chess games. Magnus is also one but he rarely uses the lines that were previously played by other chess GMs. He tries to deviate from those lines that catches his opponents off-guard and just beautifully create new lines on his games. This is Magnus' genius: he thinks like a chess AI with extreme depth that he can think of some crazy moves that even engines cannot even detect.

I love the fact that you're comparing Magnus to the AI's and not the other way around.

Makes me want to check that time when a GM beat a computer on Chess, was that Kasparov?

Weird news from Magnus Carlsen, who withdrew from the tournament he took part in yesterday:

I've withdrawn from the tournament. I've always enjoyed playing in the
@STLChessClub, and hope to be back in the future

source

It looks especially strange against the background of Mourinho's quote that he attached to the message. Hopefully later we will find out what all this means, but it is clear to me that Carlsen is moving further and further away from chess. Sad.

Maybe it's just a break.

[Boristhecat]

Weird news from Magnus Carlsen, who withdrew from the tournament he took part in yesterday:

I've withdrawn from the tournament. I've always enjoyed playing in the
@STLChessClub, and hope to be back in the future

source

It looks especially strange against the background of Mourinho's quote that he attached to the message. Hopefully later we will find out what all this means, but it is clear to me that Carlsen is moving further and further away from chess. Sad.

Maybe it's just a break.

It is now clear (although Carlsen doesn't talk about it at all) that this was due to Carlsen's opponent Hans Niemann cheating. I find it strange that the organizers of the tournament invited Niemann, who has already been caught cheating in online tournaments 2 times. Despite the fact that the opinions of the grandmasters are divided (for example, Karpov believes that the defeat is only the result of Carlsen's bad play, and Nakamura that Niemann cheated), it seems to me that everything is very clear here.

[Lucasgabd]

how clear Boristhecat?
seems like opinions are quite split in this case

Some friends commented that Carlsen didn't use to behave like that...

maybe he's getting a bit out of shape due to pursuing other things in life than chess
I don't know

[qwertyup23]

Weird news from Magnus Carlsen, who withdrew from the tournament he took part in yesterday:

I've withdrawn from the tournament. I've always enjoyed playing in the
@STLChessClub, and hope to be back in the future

source

It looks especially strange against the background of Mourinho's quote that he attached to the message. Hopefully later we will find out what all this means, but it is clear to me that Carlsen is moving further and further away from chess. Sad.

Maybe it's just a break.

It is now clear (although Carlsen doesn't talk about it at all) that this was due to Carlsen's opponent Hans Niemann cheating. I find it strange that the organizers of the tournament invited Niemann, who has already been caught cheating in online tournaments 2 times. Despite the fact that the opinions of the grandmasters are divided (for example, Karpov believes that the defeat is only the result of Carlsen's bad play, and Nakamura that Niemann cheated), it seems to me that everything is very clear here.

I somehow disagree with your statement.

Hans Niemann is not just a chessplayer but he is a GM that rose to the ranks at just 19 years old. While he may cheated in the past, this does not absolutely equate that he cheated on his on-the-board game against Magnus. He actually provided a statement since he felt that these cheating allegations damaged his reputation. After his game with Magnus, chess.com instantly banned him without even showing any proof of the alleged cheating incident.

While I do respect Magnus in every way; and that he will not do something unfounded especially that this tournament is really prestigious, at this hour, evidence must be presented on how Hans cheated. Until they present concrete and convincing evidence on the cheating allegation, I wouldn't blatantly call Hans cheating in this tournament.

[Boristhecat]

how clear Boristhecat?
seems like opinions are quite split in this case

Some friends commented that Carlsen didn't use to behave like that...

maybe he's getting a bit out of shape due to pursuing other things in life than chess
I don't know

We are not top grandmasters and not public figures to keep politeness/conventions. Given the fact that there is no direct evidence, but some big people in the world of chess are openly talking about cheating, this means that there was 100% cheating.

I somehow disagree with your statement.

Hans Niemann is not just a chessplayer but he is a GM that rose to the ranks at just 19 years old. While he may cheated in the past, this does not absolutely equate that he cheated on his on-the-board game against Magnus. He actually provided a statement since he felt that these cheating allegations damaged his reputation. After his game with Magnus, chess.com instantly banned him without even showing any proof of the alleged cheating incident.

While I do respect Magnus in every way; and that he will not do something unfounded especially that this tournament is really prestigious, at this hour, evidence must be presented on how Hans cheated. Until they present concrete and convincing evidence on the cheating allegation, I wouldn't blatantly call Hans cheating in this tournament.

What is your argument? He was caught cheating twice. Do you think this fact testifies rather in favor of the fact that he is honest or in favor of the fact that he is a cheater?
Chess.com always bans without explanation or proof, mostly it is done automatically (if chess players' moves repeat the first line of moves from chess engines), but maybe an exception was made for Niemann and he was banned manually.

In fact, I think absolutely all professional chess players understand that Niemann is a cheater and internally laugh at him (and some do it openly), just watch this video.

[qwertyup23]

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

[KTChampions]

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

I would like to know what statements everyone is talking about if Magnus silently withdrew from the tournament (except for that post, however, in which he did not speak about anyone) and is still silent? Even Kasparov demanded a public explanation from him for this act, but Magnus is still silent and ignoring him 

[LUCKMCFLY]

If I remember correctly, there are only a few types of poker left where the AI is still weaker than a human. And if you look at the trend, this situation is clear how it will end. I'm not sure exactly what Carlsen's motivation is, since in poker no one player (in modern conditions) has ever dominated. At the highest level, this is a game of luck, where the outcome is determined almost entirely by chance. For Carlsen, it's most likely just entertainment plus making money. I think advertising from an influencer like him is very expensive.

indeed it's probably expensive to hire Carlsen for an ad and he's probably picky on which companies to advertise for

regarding Poker and AI, can AI bluff? curious about it
for sure it can calculate the mathematical possibilities better than humans, but poker is not only luck, it's a game of skill

What is the game of skill? In all games where only skill is taken into account, AI is already undeniably better than a person - chess, GO, checkers, any other board games. As for bluffing, I can’t answer this question because I don’t know the details, but it seems to me that it can because from the AI point of view, bluffing is a common action in the game that leads to certain consequences with certain probabilities. Since the AI calculates all these probabilities, why not use this technique.

this is the point
AI will take the mathematical and logical approach
and some things are beyond this domain
bluffing is one of them
even though AI can calculate the odds of determined combination of cards being the winner, top poker players can also do it
winning on poker is not about it, it's way more

totally different game than chess
makes sense?

Well this is something remarkable, the truth is that I have always put in context that one has a logic developed thanks to Chess and that it can be applied to any event in life, this means that why not? it can be applied with poker, which is another thing that AI has a great advantage over us, it can perform calculations and statistics in record time and that is something that has a lot of weight, for me these things if a human manages to overcome it means that it still we are above the AI, as long as we are dominating that I think we could beat it even at "random", that is why that word that many repeat called "luck" arises.

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

I find it incredible that these things happen, it's absolutely amazing to me, I don't know, but these things didn't used to happen before, right? For now I think that things always come to light that before had more restraint to do, however people and players, especially those who have never known defeat, are capable of doing whatever it takes to maintain their status as the best, this is something that surprises, one of the greats like Kasparov never even came close to doing something like that, now how do they manage to do bad things because I think that the human being has no limits. And as he says, if Kasparov himself demanded explanations is certainly something serious.

[South Park]

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

While I agree with you we must also understand that the kind of standards that are necessary in a court of law in order to prove the culpability of a suspect are not necessarily the standards that are going to be used on every other single instance we can find, it is known that computers play differently than the way humans do and this is because they think about chess in a different way, humans find patterns and reduce the possible moves that they can make thanks to their experience, computers just evaluate hundreds of millions of moves per second, this means that computers can make some very weird moves that humans do not understand, so if the top expert in the world of chess says there is something fishy then most likely there is something there.

[Lucasgabd]

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

While I agree with you we must also understand that the kind of standards that are necessary in a court of law in order to prove the culpability of a suspect are not necessarily the standards that are going to be used on every other single instance we can find, it is known that computers play differently than the way humans do and this is because they think about chess in a different way, humans find patterns and reduce the possible moves that they can make thanks to their experience, computers just evaluate hundreds of millions of moves per second, this means that computers can make some very weird moves that humans do not understand, so if the top expert in the world of chess says there is something fishy then most likely there is something there.

I understand your point
but it's worth remembering that we live in really weird times nowadays with cancellation culture at its peak
I still think that we should have evidences to condemn someone for a crime....

[LUCKMCFLY]

<snip...>

Again, evidence is king. Even if a person has been previously convicted of a crime, that does not entirely mean that they would do the same. Until the camp of Magnus presents solid proof and evidence of Hans cheating on the over-the-board tournament, the fact still remains that this has definitely took a toll to his reputation.

Let us just wait until they release more evidence in proving the cheating that Hans did. While I do respect Magnus, this is the time that he must present solid proof that will substantiate his claim against Hans cheating.

While I agree with you we must also understand that the kind of standards that are necessary in a court of law in order to prove the culpability of a suspect are not necessarily the standards that are going to be used on every other single instance we can find, it is known that computers play differently than the way humans do and this is because they think about chess in a different way, humans find patterns and reduce the possible moves that they can make thanks to their experience, computers just evaluate hundreds of millions of moves per second, this means that computers can make some very weird moves that humans do not understand, so if the top expert in the world of chess says there is something fishy then most likely there is something there.

But they should publish the evidence, it still seems unbelievable to me that Hans has those things to show, I can't believe it, could this be a montage to create more fame for him? in the camp he would have many beds right? I don't know, but it's so strange because now in tournaments everything is so guarded.

And I see that it has gone to great lengths, because even a court of Justice has come, and what you say is true, computers play differently but only because they base everything on numbers and probabilities, so computers don't think they just execute and quickly you know all the moves, that's why they are different.