Talk:Fabuloso Friday 2/Fabuloso Chess/AISucks

From zefrank

• To Muyfabuloso's vote comment, I haven't seen anything that would require a chess AI during this game. Your comment makes no sense. We have enough people here to go through most, if not all variations anyhow. BTW, way back when we played Nd7 the first time, it was a blunder. Brigade and I voted for it and black came out lucky because Ze could have been at least a pawn up. A better line was seen by others and rightfully so. It didn't take any kind of genius to see when a move loses a pawn. After that, I decided to pay more attention to the lines I look at. I've corrected myself on more than one occasion and so has everyone else. I don't know who your comment was directed at, but please keep broad spectrum insults to yourself. V 16:46, 6 August 2006 (PDT)

• I find it odd that the same people who couldn't organize Fabuloso Friday are somehow capable of playing a mathematically-perfect game of chess. The only recent moves where there has been any disagreement happen to line up exactly where two chess engines provide the same split. The people using the software know who they are. And I'd encourage them to knock off the cheating. If you don't know how to play chess, play elsewhere in the wiki. And if you do, try doing more than just pasting in computer-generated move sequences. muyfabuloso^talk 20:49, 6 August 2006 (PDT)
• I would love it if both of you could comment on the move as well, since I don't think it has really been given enough consideration. Geedubber

• Yeah, me too -- I'd love to see some actual chess analysis anywhere on any move in this wiki. Any of you guys ever pick up even a basic chess book? Again, I find the lack of insight and strategy discussion here to be very telling. Nobody is discussing strategy at all -- just dumping out tactics -- yet we're just magically stumbling down a great path? Lucky us. It's a bunch of nonsense. I've been very understated and positive in the wiki until now, but this chess situation is really ugly. muyfabuloso^talk 20:49, 6 August 2006 (PDT)
• Geedubber, what move? This one? Nc5 was planned a few moves back. If anyone wants to talk about strategy (especially Muyfabulosa), we decided not to play a closed game because most of our pieces were on the king side (or at least our active pieces). I commented on this numerous times. Finally, we decided to exchange f pawns to open up that side that leads up to this position. Before all this, I believe I was the first one to point out that we should put more pressure on the white e pawn because we can bring more pieces than white bearing down on that square. The queen, the bishop and now our knight is fulfilling that strategy. We even had the rook going there, but the exchange of rooks happened in reverse order than what we thought, so this led to the alternate move Re2 instead of making it attack the e4 square as planned. In the beginning of the game, we were losing control of the center and we needed to fix that. At that point, the game could have gone either way for us. Ze could have come out ahead as I pointed out earlier. There's nothing magical about this. So either the chess AI muyfabuloso speaks of is faulty or we're talking about a whole lot of nothing. BTW muyfabuloso, why are you looking at a chess AI? During most of this game, we've been defending and trying to regain the center. The f pawn exchange was the only offense we've had. So perhaps there's too much emphasis on strategy in this game when most moves have been rather reactive up until the f exchange. Having said that, if anyone IS using a chess AI, they're wasting their time as there's nothing on this wiki that anyone here wouldn't be able to see on their own anyhow. V 22:03, 6 August 2006 (PDT)

• The same people who can't string three jokes together manage to play chess at the 2200+ level? It's a miracle! Nobody has put together any strategy that makes any sense, just lots of slow tactical grinding -- the precise stuff that humans are bad at and computers are good at. (One exception is Kingpatzer and Brigade playing out variations way back when but both have gone pretty quiet lately). Instead now the same people that ten moves ago were asking "which piece is the king and which is the queen?" are now voting along with obscure moves suggested by chess software. Looking at this board it's clear that any of the knight moves get very complicated -- far more complicated and requiring a longer-term strategy than has been discussed above. In particular the Ng3+ lines were ignored pretty quickly, but that's where I had to spend the most time thinking. But wow, computer software jumps right over it. What a coincidence! Regardless, the queen move is the one I'd expect to see in the real world. muyfabuloso^talk 23:24, 6 August 2006 (PDT)

• You are way to fucking serious. I am not some chess master but I love to play chess once for a while and I enjoy this game. I do not need to (and I do not want to) read books in order to play chess with Ze. I suggested some moves in a past and made many blunders that were picked up by fabulosos. When they convinced me that I was wrong, I have changed my mind and voted accordingly. Do some hard chargers use AI? I do not know, as I do not know how to recognize moves proposed by AI (you seem to be an expert in it). But I tell you one thing: if you do not convince me that your move is good, I am not gona vote for it. If you do not like this democratic process and want to play with some professional chess players go ahead. I am sure there are planty of web sites for hard chargers. Let us enjoy this game. Cubzas 07:26, 7 August 2006 (PDT)

• Well said, Cubzas! PTWhipplebang^SR! 08:39, 7 August 2006 (PDT)
• Interesting how the people who are contributing the least are the most offended. If you're stumbling through bad moves and the dudes with the computers keep correcting you, again, it's okay to just shut up. Chess requires tactics and strategy. We've focused purely on tactics and utterly ignored strategy. Nobody's ever managed to guess Ze's next move when it mattered. Yet somehow we're playing a nearly perfect game. Apparently wikis are inherently bad for encyclopedias and comedy but inherently fantastic for chess. Who knew? muyfabuloso^talk 09:39, 7 August 2006 (PDT)

• When was the last time you provided any analysis yourself? It seems to me that there are 4 or 5 people participating that have more chess experience than the rest of us and that the result of our collaboration is that we make fewer mistakes. I don't find that too hard to believe. You're making this experience much less fun with your baseless accusations that you have no hope of proving. I don't want to turn this into a bitchfest, so this is all I'm going to say. PTWhipplebang^SR! 09:49, 7 August 2006 (PDT)
• Well "master muyfabuloso", I did see many times that fabulosos have predicted Ze's moves. Again, I have no way to determine which moves are generated by AI (YOU know, because YOU use it) In fact, I have been first to post Qxe4 this time and only after discussion with Kingpatzer decided to vote N moves. Next time, if you want people to vote on your favorite move, try to convince them and maybe not offend them. Right now, I am still not sure, if you are chess master, but I have made up my mind on other characteristics of your character... Cubzas 09:58, 7 August 2006 (PDT)

• There's really no point in contributing to the chess move discussion here since a people are using software. So all the good moves magically appear -- with no strategy or analysis to back them up, and no forward thinking to point where they go. Then this is repeated next move. It's pretty stupid. (And when did I say anything about my chess skills? Admittedly I'm one of four people who had the balls to actually play some chess here -- and that one game hardly means much -- but that has nothing to do with the issue at hand.) Obviously I'm not here to make friends or convince people to vote for my "favorite move" -- that's kinda lonely and pathetic, dude. You dipshits can't even agree on voting procedure after 27 moves. The real issue is the cheating. I don't recall mentioning either of you two (WhippleBang and Cubzas) and frankly you haven't contributed much to the game so, quick hint: maybe I'm not talking about you. muyfabuloso^talk 13:29, 7 August 2006 (PDT)