Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 19, 2010, 10:54 AM
time out please. lets just start over here and keep it cool.
2 wrongs don't make a right.
hyde, if you want to question me and ali if we are the same person, feel free to contact us or a admin via the private messages.
piecraft, if you feel bullied or offended by another, please contact a admin via the private messages.
do not react publicly in a foul manner, you will be found equally guilty as the person you are complaining about if you do it in a questionably offensive way.
piecraft, when i do reply about my disagreance with you about your theory, i will be mindful to be respectful of you in how i relay it. thank you for sharing your theory and opinion with us.
good day.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
542
Registered:
May 9, 2002
From:
Northeast USA
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 19, 2010, 6:40 PM
piecraft, you seem to be relatively new to the forums although you've been a member at this site for a while. Swearing at other members with hateful insults is not acceptable here. Be more respectful.
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 1:38 AM
You are right of course, that was not the right way to do things. Not normally a hothead but that dude really ticked me off. Apologies to everyone else, especially Alison.
Posts:
66
Registered:
Dec 13, 2008
From:
New York City
Age:
58
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 1:08 PM
> to be on the same page here,.. > > the theory i am disputing is the following statement > made by pie craft. > > "So, yes Nosovs can be beaten, but only if > he chooses to be beaten" > > > i can easily prove beyond a reasonable doubt that > this is a false statement.
That would hardly be necessary; anyone can look in the game database and find games lost by Nosovs. That is the kind of thing I would consider "scientific" proof.
To those really interested in learning, the important "fact" in Piecraft's contribution to this debate may be summarized as "one either makes a mistake or one doesn't."
Since every opinion now constitutes a theory, find "scientific" evidence to disprove this one: "perhaps Nosovs just happens to have more talent for playing pente than everyone else on this site (with the possible exception of Richard III)."
Another question, in what dictionary did you find "disagreance"?
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 5:24 PM
All you guys seem to be saying is that nosovs can make an error even when playing a perfect line. Well, ok an error could occur yes, but I am taking it from zoeyk's own comments that Nosovs makes less errors than anyone else playing P1. Of course you can find his P1 losses - but so what? Pointing out that even he is human and can make errors does not undo my point since everyone makes errors, and so we can cancel out errors on both sides. If we didn't cancel out the errors, by zoeyk's comments a comparison of errors would favour Nosovs anyway. So that leads us back to my point.
That is, that if there are known perfect lines of play for P1, then it clearly is at the discretion of Nosovs as to whether to play these lines or not. I fail to see how you can argue with that comment. If you are saying that there are no known perfect lines then ok, but if you are saying that there are, then my point must be true.
So again, assuming player one executes said lines correctly then that player will not lose.
I restate with qualification to appease the error focused: Since Nosovs can chose to always play perfect lines, barring the rarest event of him making an error when executing a perfect line, losing as P1 is at his discretion. And, since his error rate is apparently lower than everyone else's - as stated by zoeyk - then, it is effectively at his discretion as to whether he retains his number 1 spot.
This is not a theory. I am just pointing out what I see as pretty obvious.
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 10:13 PM
to classy. i am known for being a bad speller. the spell check had no good suggestion for it, so i just left it as is, and hoped people could figure out what i meant.
sorry bout that.
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 10:24 PM
ok, pie craft.
look at it this way for a sec. there have been many P1 lines that have considered both by the data base and by master players as perfect moves for P1. a common belief.
there is a game i can show like this (many actually) and nosovs played this common known perfect play P1 line. and he lost. a new novelty was found by a smart player where it points out a exploit we didn't know about. so now all of a sudden a move that had a killer win streak by top players such as richard karlw zoey nosovs and more.. is now officially known as a losing position for P1. but none knew this at the time that nosovs placed the stone on the board as P1. so when he made a mistake he did it in good faith that he was using a proven perfect play move. thus he did not consciously chose to lose nor do any thing less than perfect. he just didn't know...
yes he chose a mistake, but he honestly thought he was using perfect play to the best of his knowledge..
this is why i can not agree with the way that you have written your statement.
human theorized perfect play moves are only such until either a exploiting novelty is discovered, or until a better P1 line is found that makes the prior pale in comparrison.
there are 2 kinds of perfect play, that sometimes are the same lines and sometimes are not.
actual perfect play only god knows.. or a super computer yet to be built.
when we humans say perfect play, it is a common belief of top players having a opinion about moves. and several times in pente history time and time again these are being redefined. human perfect play is only a assumption made by top players and is subject to change when forced to do so by way of new exploiting novelties, or superior P1 alternatives.
so do we really know what is perfect play then? no, but we like to guess. and we enjoy to be proven wrong time and time again.
regards zoey
Message was edited by: zoeyk at Jun 20, 2010 4:24 PM
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
Posts:
66
Registered:
Dec 13, 2008
From:
New York City
Age:
58
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 20, 2010, 10:28 PM
Many of us can, Z, but there are international members of the site whose first language is not English such as Nosovs, and others, who tend to rely on their dictionaries to figure out what we are saying.
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 21, 2010, 2:35 AM
Zoey, thanks for clearing something up for me. For a long while you have been using this concept of perfect lines for P1 as if these were absolutely known for sure.
I have always considered it to be possible for perfect lines to exist, but have not been convinced that anyone could actually know for sure that a given line is perfect. Recently you commented to me that you are working towards and hope to achieve perfect play as P1. I think that in light of your post you should find ways to be more precise about what you are saying here because I can see the basis for confusion.
I myself have been using the same language and have assumed there are known P1 perfect lines even though I am not convinced they are really known.
While I don't agree with Piecraft's philosophy per se, I think that he is extending logically from your previous statements that perfect lines exist, and on what you have implied many times; that top players know these lines and know for certain that they are perfect. Given you are now saying that this is not so, I would say that if he is incorrect it is due to basing his assumptions on what you have previously said.
Having said that, I would support his contention (in principle at least) that if players did know perfect lines for sure, then winning and losing is discretionary. I just don't agree with him that losing isn't really losing!
Posts:
2,220
Registered:
Mar 4, 2007
From:
San Francisco
Age:
45 Home page
Re: Can Nosovs be beaten?
Posted:
Jun 21, 2010, 3:17 AM
well im not commenting yet one way or the other on the rest of the argument between you two. but when i saw that sentence he wrote i had to disagree and then clarify.
keep in mind there are some P1 lines that we do know for sure is perfect play. just not all of them. if P2 does not open optimally and P1 has a fast control with limited width and depth in the move tree then humans can easily map this line out to 100% certainty.
but between strong players in a opening this rarely is the case that we can predict whats coming down the line, and so we rely on other principles to proceed in reading the state of the board one motion at a time with as much for sight as we can muster.
z
Scire hostis animum - Intelligere ludum - Nosce te ipsum - Prima moventur conciliat - Nolite errare
