Time to revise modern theory

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Maybe the line

Code: Select all

7...Nh5 8.g3 f5 9.ef5 gf5 10.Bg5, followed by Qd2 and castling long

is more promising for black. Perhaps black should wait with castling short.
After white castling long black can sacrifice his b pawn with a6 b5 or play c6 trying to open c file.

all reasonable lines, but white simply has too big an advantage.

[drj4759]

I think that chess endgame phase is practically solved as evidenced by the many choices of endgame databases which do what it was designed for.

The middle game is where the action and excitement is because it is not yet fully understood by engine developers. But when the time that the opening books are matured in which the first 20 opening moves ends with a score of +-30cp, it will be difficult to score a win.

Cerebellum energized some opening book makers to make good opening books. Maybe with their synergy and absorbing the best opening lines from each book, a near perfect opening book will soon appear in the future. When this will come to pass, the next stage will be extending the opening lines into the middle game and even the endgame. Some books already touched the middlegame and endgame phases with move depths up to 100! On average, middlegame starts at depth 20 and end game at depth 40. Cerebellum's depth is 36 which is middlegame and early endgame territory.

The opening book size of of Cerebellum is tiny which has great room for improvements. If it's developers pour more resources or others are willing to fund it, the time will come that it will produce a fantastic opening book. Others will just be contented to assimilate its strength and will eventually lead to neutral chess opening games. Then, the next phase will be creating a middle game book based on this neutralized opening books and then there will be lesser and lesser wins or losses which will eventually lead further to draws. No more need for endgame databases.

Chess is solved...

[Henk]

Hope that every user knows that depth means nothing. It might have erroneously skipped billions of relevant moves.

[Alibaba]

Pure nonsense....nothing is lost.....

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

On average, middlegame starts at depth 20 and end game at depth 40. Cerebellum's depth is 36 which is middlegame and early endgame territory.

what is your definition of endgame? supposedly available non-pawn material(black+white side) < total non-pawn material(black+white side)/2

in that case, endgame could arrive only at move 100/ply 200, which numbers will only increase with increasing strength of chess engines. Do not you follow TCEC, with each new addition and longer the TC, average length of games only gets longer and longer...

But engines have not solved even simple endgames, zillions of them, even when total non-pawn material is less than queen value + 2 times minor piece value. Engines simply do not see a lot of similar fortresses, and tablebases do not help either, as with pawns you will have 10-12 men or so.

Chess is solved...

good news, this means SF and Komodo will add some 0.0 elo points in the next years. Pfew, for all that work!

Remember what I will say: if current top chess engines are 3300 or so, chess will be solved not before this number reaches 7000.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Hope that every user knows that depth means nothing. It might have erroneously skipped billions of relevant moves.

In that vein, I have always wondered why Skipper is called so: because it is a boss/captain, or because it skips too many good moves?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Pure nonsense....nothing is lost.....

prove it with lines; I can do so, but you can not.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

1.h4 probably draws, but 1.h3 is better.

one line about which I can not decide if it is won or draw is 1.b4, probably white holds, but has to toil for it and play very careful: any mistake could cost the game.

[drj4759]

There is no exact boundary of opening, middlegame and endgame, my statement is a generalization. Chess endgame definition is dependent on the person who interprets its, it means so many parameters.

Current chess engines technology could not solve opening, middle game or endgame by itself. It is the opening database or endgame database that is making it happen as these are reducing it to science. Middlegame database will wait until the opening database is near perfect.

For as long as there are idiot chess engines, Stockfish and Komodo will continue to gain ELO points. If Stockfish, Brainfish or Komodo will self-play against themselves, the ELO difference is close to 0 even without opening or endgame databases. If they make improvements from their previous versions, that is where the ELO is gained.

Chess engines ELO ratings are not standard. One can choose what they want. I can have top ELO rating of 10,000 in my rating list if I am inspired. Right now, Stockfish 8 is 3500+ in my rating list.

I consider the chess game solved when Stockfish vs. Komodo or any top chess engine play against each other with the help of opening + middlegame + endgame books and it always ends in a draw. It is not yet here today, but it will be probably in the future.

[Maharadja]

Remember what I will say: if current top chess engines are 3300 or so, chess will be solved not before this number reaches 7000.

From your posts and claims it looks like you are already somewhere between 6500 and 7000.