Whatever is current - Amazing Leela

[Dann Corbit]

Yes, that would be a good technique.
But I am really not that interested in this opening.

[EroSennin]

Databases are meant for humans to find what other humans are often playing.

[jp]

So far, this is the highest ranked game using that opening that I have found:
[Event "Napoleon Trophy Blitz"]
[White "Van Foreest, Jorden"]
[Black "Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime"]

I always found funny how ppl can take mediocre games by some pathetic humans as a reference for something.

And yet Lc0 can be Tactically blind.
And yet SF can make opening blunders.
And these humans are roughly 2700.
The real problem here (for reference purposes) is that there are zero games between high end computer systems for this odd (1.e4 e5 2.Qf3 *) opening.

The biggest problem in this particular game is that it was blitz. What level of chess would a 2700 player be reduced to when his time is reduced from 2hrs to 5 minutes? Under 2300?

[Dann Corbit]

So far, this is the highest ranked game using that opening that I have found:
[Event "Napoleon Trophy Blitz"]
[White "Van Foreest, Jorden"]
[Black "Vachier-Lagrave, Maxime"]

I always found funny how ppl can take mediocre games by some pathetic humans as a reference for something.

And yet Lc0 can be Tactically blind.
And yet SF can make opening blunders.
And these humans are roughly 2700.
The real problem here (for reference purposes) is that there are zero games between high end computer systems for this odd (1.e4 e5 2.Qf3 *) opening.

The biggest problem in this particular game is that it was blitz. What level of chess would a 2700 player be reduced to when his time is reduced from 2hrs to 5 minutes? Under 2300?

For a single game, it is very hard to measure.
It could be they played mistake free chess.
It could be full of blunders.

I once analyzed a game between two Swedish IM players, full of brilliancy and not a single blunder (according to the engines at one hour per move).
I have also seen super GMs perform a blunder at slow time control.
Anything can happen in a single game.

I guess the important thing about a game between two players of about 2700 is that the opening will not be an accident. The one who drove the opening has studied it with a particular plan in mind. Probably has some sort of snappy surprise around some particular corner.

[jp]

I guess the important thing about a game between two players of about 2700 is that the opening will not be an accident. The one who drove the opening has studied it with a particular plan in mind. Probably has some sort of snappy surprise around some particular corner.

I don't think this is really true for blitz. They tend to play stuff they would never want to play for a more serious game and they have no time to prepare between rounds.

[Dann Corbit]

On move two, he uncorked Qf3. I doubt if it was on a whim.
https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=1039784

Now, I do not disagree that preparation for tournament time control and blitz games is different.

In fact, I do not think any GM will play that opening in a serious game at slow time control.

But I am pretty sure Qf3 was not an accident and/or was completely without preparation. If he played it, he had some goal in mind.

[Uri Blass]

Databases are meant for humans to find what other humans are often playing.

humans also want to know what moves are best.

If 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 gives advantage for black then I expect top human players OTB to study it in order to use the killing line against it in OTB games when it worth a lot of money and not in infinity chess when it worth almost nothing(I read first prize of only 500$ in one tournament in infinity chess) and nobody know even about the person who used it so I do not believe all the claims about 3.Bc4 is bad unless I see it is bad based on recent games between 2700+ OTB players.

Note that I could see one game in infinity chess when black won against 3.Bc4
Note that I can see the same notation for moves that are not pawn moves and I see

1.e4 e5 2.f3 c6 3.c4 c5 4.0–0 f6 5.d3 d6 6.c3 a5 7.g5 h6 when I use copy and paste for part of the game but I could translate it to pgn thanks to the diagram that I see later in the link.

http://www.infinitychess.com/Page/Publi ... spx?id=334

game started
[pgn]1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. c3 a5 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Bg3 O-O 10. a4 Kg7 11. Nbd2 Ba7 12. Re1 Ng8 13. h3 Nge7 14. Rc1 Ng6 15. Nf1 h5 16. d4 g4 17. hxg4 hxg4 18. N3h2 exd4 19. cxd4 Nxd4 20. Ne3 Qg5 [/pgn]

I read that 21.Nhxg4 is a mistake.
Of course one bad line is not close to prove that 3.Bc4 is bad for white.

[EroSennin]

Databases are meant for humans to find what other humans are often playing.

humans also want to know what moves are best.

The thing is that kind of analysis only improve our chess by 1-5%. If I have to spend 20 hours to find what's the best move in one particular position, it obviously becomes a rather inefficient way to spend time towards improving my openings. Much better is to spend 5 minutes for each of those 20 hours to find 240 decent maybe best moves.

[jp]

On move two, he uncorked Qf3. I doubt if it was on a whim.

But I am pretty sure Qf3 was not an accident and/or was completely without preparation. If he played it, he had some goal in mind.

No, they just want to get away from opening theory and have fresh positions that are equal but let them just play.

[zullil]

Databases are meant for humans to find what other humans are often playing.

humans also want to know what moves are best.

If 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bc4 gives advantage for black then I expect top human players OTB to study it in order to use the killing line against it in OTB games when it worth a lot of money and not in infinity chess when it worth almost nothing(I read first prize of only 500$ in one tournament in infinity chess) and nobody know even about the person who used it so I do not believe all the claims about 3.Bc4 is bad unless I see it is bad based on recent games between 2700+ OTB players.

Note that I could see one game in infinity chess when black won against 3.Bc4
Note that I can see the same notation for moves that are not pawn moves and I see

To see the chess figurines on the page you linked to, install CBArialLink fonts.

Here is the full game. I entered it manually, so I hope it is error free.

[pgn][Event "Infinity Chess 38th Engine Masters --- 12+2"] [Date "26.05.2019"] [Round "1"] [White "Ugnatniama (Eman 3.72)"] [Black "Murx (Lc0)"] [Result "0-1"] [ECO "C54"] 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 Bc5 4. O-O Nf6 5. d3 d6 6. c3 a5 7. Bg5 h6 8. Bh4 g5 9. Bg3 O-O 10. a4 Kg7 11. Nbd2 Ba7 12. Re1 Ng8 13. h3 Nge7 14. Rc1 Ng6 15. Nf1 h5 16. d4 g4 17. hxg4 hxg4 18. N3h2 exd4 19. cxd4 Nxd4 20. Ne3 Qg5 21. Nhxg4 Rh8 22. Nh2 Ne5 23. Nef1 Kf8 24. Rc3 Bd7 25. Qd2 Qxd2 26. Nxd2 f6 27. Bxe5 fxe5 28. b3 Ke7 29. Rg3 Rh7 30. Bg8 Rh8 31. Bc4 Ne6 32. Bxe6 Kxe6 33. Rc1 Bc5 34. Rcc3 Rhg8 35. Rh3 Raf8 36. Nhf3 Rh8 37. Rxh8 Rxh8 38. Rc2 Rg8 39. Ne1 Bc6 40. Nd3 Bd4 41. Ne1 Rf8 42. Nef3 Bc5 43. g3 Bb4 44. Rc1 Rg8 45. Re1 Kd7 46. Rd1 Rf8 47. Kg2 Kc8 48. Kg1 b6 49. Kg2 Ba8 50. Kf1 Bb7 51. Kg1 Ba6 52. Kg2 Be2 53. Ra1 c6 54. Ng1 Bc3 55. Rc1 Bxd2 56. Rxc6+ Kb7 57. Rc2 Bd1 58. Rxd2 Bxb3 59. Rxd6 Bxa4 60. Nf3 Re8 61. Nd2 b5 62. Rd5 Kb6 63. Rd6+ Kc7 64. Rd3 Rd8 65. Rc3+ Kb6 66. Nf3 b4 67. Rc1 Bb5 68. Rb1 Bc6 69. Re1 a4 70. Nxe5 Bb5 71. Rb1 Ka5 72. Nf7 Rd4 73. Ng5 a3 74. Nf3 Rd3 75. Ne1 Rc3 76. Ra1 Ka4 77. Nf3 b3 78. Nd2 a2 79. g4 Ka3 80. Nb1+ Kb2 81. Nxc3 Kxa1 82. g5 Kb2 83. Nxb5 a1=Q 84. Nd4 Qa4 85. Nxb3 Qxb3 86. f3 Qe3 87. g6 Qg5+ 88. Kf1 Qxg6 89. Kf2 Kc3 90. Ke3 Qg3 91. e5 Qxe5+ 92. Kf2 Kd2 93. f4 Qxf4+ 94. Kg1 Ke2 95. Kg2 Qg5+ 96. Kh2 Kf2 97. Kh3 Qh5# 0-1[/pgn]