Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
My goal was to only try to draw some games, even if playing ugly, defensive chess, and it proved that it is not at all difficult to do that. To tell you the truth, I get the same score when playing with Stockfish default and Stockfish with contempt 3, i.e. my usual 20-25%, involving some wins, many draws and even more losses. (but here I must say once again for all those that think that there is some hoax here, that I regard my results as due to somewhat unfair competition, as I, for once, give myself more time, usually 2 times more than Stockfish, and twice, play lines that I am more or less familiar with; on the other hand, Stockfish plays blitz and uses multiple cores)
if you were allowed 5 takebacks per game and/or pawn and move odds could you win ? if not then what would you need ?
I would not accept any takebacks. I just need LTC and much of quiet, i.e. Fischer playing conditions. But I am playing just for fun, there are other stronger players on the line to face the machines: let Carlsen and Nakamura think of it.
I would say that if a have a full pawn odds (which I would never accept, as this is not interesting to me), I would win a match against any top engine even at shorter time control (30' + 15'' increment). One pawn is an enormous advantage, it practically means that you have already won the game before it has even started, regardless of whether you play the white or the black side.
However, my results would only be possible when you have quiet conditions, and in most tournaments you will never get those, except possibly if you play in Simpson's in the Strand.
With all due respect my friend,I don't think that this is possible....
I am sure that you recall the Rybka's games against GMs using material odds and the results respectively.... ,
Dr.D
Wael, you miss the fact that those GMs had not been prepared to play anticomputer chess. They just played the way they knew, but that certainly was not the best strategy.
I know that but nowadays chess engines along with the hardware are far stronger than Deep Rybka 3 & Depp Rybka 4.1....
It's a fact you must take into consideration....
Besides,Material odds chess games are not real chess after all regards,
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
My goal was to only try to draw some games, even if playing ugly, defensive chess, and it proved that it is not at all difficult to do that. To tell you the truth, I get the same score when playing with Stockfish default and Stockfish with contempt 3, i.e. my usual 20-25%, involving some wins, many draws and even more losses. (but here I must say once again for all those that think that there is some hoax here, that I regard my results as due to somewhat unfair competition, as I, for once, give myself more time, usually 2 times more than Stockfish, and twice, play lines that I am more or less familiar with; on the other hand, Stockfish plays blitz and uses multiple cores)
if you were allowed 5 takebacks per game and/or pawn and move odds could you win ? if not then what would you need ?
I would not accept any takebacks. I just need LTC and much of quiet, i.e. Fischer playing conditions. But I am playing just for fun, there are other stronger players on the line to face the machines: let Carlsen and Nakamura think of it.
I would say that if a have a full pawn odds (which I would never accept, as this is not interesting to me), I would win a match against any top engine even at shorter time control (30' + 15'' increment). One pawn is an enormous advantage, it practically means that you have already won the game before it has even started, regardless of whether you play the white or the black side.
However, my results would only be possible when you have quiet conditions, and in most tournaments you will never get those, except possibly if you play in Simpson's in the Strand.
what about castle bishop odds? could you win those
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
I would say that if a have a full pawn odds (which I would never accept, as this is not interesting to me), I would win a match against any top engine even at shorter time control (30' + 15'' increment). One pawn is an enormous advantage, it practically means that you have already won the game before it has even started, regardless of whether you play the white or the black side.
However, my results would only be possible when you have quiet conditions, and in most tournaments you will never get those, except possibly if you play in Simpson's in the Strand.
quite impressive. do you have in your house these quiet conditions and would you have any interest in showing 3 consecutive wins of 30' + 15'' increment with pawn odds. if only to disprove the sceptics.
If you want to be taken seriously, why not have a controlled match against one of the top engines in controlled conditions. Sorry to say, but your claim that you can regularly beat these engines smells a little ... especially seeing how doggedly you defended Ivanov in his obvious cheating scandal where he was using computer help in his games. Maybe you both have something in common ... not the cheating part of course ... but you know ... the mysterious,yet incredible ability to play the game of chess at a level not yet understood by other mortal human beings. Please let us setup a match between you and any engine ... no need big hardware ... any desktop will do. Put the conditions up and I am sure a lot of people would be interested in observing how you crush these digital monsters. Kramnik, Carlsen, Anand, Aronian, Nakaumura ... all these guys will probably want a front row seat! I don't count Kasparov as he is retired and your immense talent would probably go right over his head I think it is about time that the world discovered your incredible abilities!
If you use contempt value 3 If I understood it correctly you are only using contempt of 3% of a pawn value, not minor piece. So you should use maximum 50 to have real expirience
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: To tell you the truth, I get the same score when playing with Stockfish default and Stockfish with contempt 3, i.e. my usual 20-25%, involving some wins, many draws and even more losses. (but here I must say once again for all those that think that there is some hoax here, that I regard my results as due to somewhat unfair competition, as I, for once, give myself more time, usually 2 times more than Stockfish, and twice, play lines that I am more or less familiar with; on the other hand, Stockfish plays blitz and uses multiple cores)
so what elo does your 20-25% give stockfish. 2600 ?
It seems that Joerg might have been partially right about setting maximum contempt to Stockfish, as at least for the time being the engine plays much better in defence as with the usual setup. Actually, I have a difficult time winning even in my familiar attacking build-ups. Unlike Stockfish with no contempt or low contempt, for some reason the high contempt makes the engine sense the danger much sooner and it frequently avoids positional traps.
Below 3 games where I did not manage to break through even in familiar positions:
Some diagrams to illustrate the point that Stockfish really senses the danger coming much sooner.
[d]r4rk1/1bq1bp1p/2n1pnp1/pp1pN1P1/2pP1P2/P1P1P2R/1PBN3P/R1BQ2K1 b - - 0 15
Here Stockfish rightly plays 15...Ne4, instead of the usual retreat somewhere, and I find nothing more than a draw.
[d]r2qr1k1/1b3pbp/4p1p1/1p1pPnP1/p1pP1Q1P/P1P1PN2/1PBB1K1R/R7 b - - 0 23
Now Stockfish plays 23...Kf8. Brilliant. The king goes to the center, as it senses danger already, and indeed, if the black king stays on the king side, it will soon get mated. I very much liked that move. When the king is under severe attack, it should try to find better shelter, taking a stroll. Stockfish default or with contempt set low will never see this move.
[d]rnbbq1rk/1pp3n1/pN1p4/P2Pp3/1PQ1Ppp1/1B6/2P2PPN/R1B2RK1 b - - 0 25
Stockfish has just played 25. Nb6. It seems that this version not only defends better, but also attacks and counterattacks better.
[d]rn1b3k/1pp4r/p4n2/P2PQ3/BP2Ppp1/8/2P1KPP1/R1B1R2q b - - 0 34
Probably I miss here something, but Stockfish seems to defend extremely well. It puts you under pressure even when its position is worse.
The first conclusion that I will make is that indeed it seems to me that Stockfish with maximum contempt should be able to play more successfully against humans, but I beliebe that would be true only with short time control. The thing that struck me is that the engine understands king safety much better than the default, I do not know what special features manage to do that, but whatever they are, I think that the king safety of this version could successfully replace the king safety of the dafault. Maybe this is true only in blitz, maybe only against humans, which I do not believe, but I never saw another Stockfish version with better king safety. Maybe bigger agressiveness makes so that the engine senses danger earlier.
At the same time, what makes me think that at LTC the version with maximum contempt will not perform any better even against humans is that it quite frequently is ready to sacrifice material (usually pawns) for the initiative. While the game in that way looks much more attractive to the eye, playing with potential suboptimal moves in a variety of positions exposes the engine to certain risks even against despised humans at LTC.
And what makes me think that the version with maximum contempt is not so immune to being mated, but probably I am just in a very much suboptimal form, are 2 games I played when I was almost falling asleep. I gave myself more time, but what matters more is the bizarre way both games ended.
[d]2rk4/p3bPBB/4p3/3pP2Q/3P4/P1q5/7R/3n2K1 w - - 0 47
I am sure I missed here something, but maybe not.
[d]5krr/q4p1p/b3pN2/p1bpPpPP/2p2P2/PpP1P2Q/1P1B1KR1/6R1 w - - 0 33
[d]6k1/1b3qPr/4pP2/p2p1p2/2p2P1B/PpP1P2Q/1P6/5KR1 b - - 0 44
Nothing to do when you are not in good form. To tell you the truth, I somehow got tired of playing different contempt versions. Maybe I will just stick to the default or a version with some contempt, but it is possible that I play some more games with maximum contempt.
M ANSARI wrote:If you want to be taken seriously, why not have a controlled match against one of the top engines in controlled conditions. Sorry to say, but your claim that you can regularly beat these engines smells a little ... especially seeing how doggedly you defended Ivanov in his obvious cheating scandal where he was using computer help in his games. Maybe you both have something in common ... not the cheating part of course ... but you know ... the mysterious,yet incredible ability to play the game of chess at a level not yet understood by other mortal human beings. Please let us setup a match between you and any engine ... no need big hardware ... any desktop will do. Put the conditions up and I am sure a lot of people would be interested in observing how you crush these digital monsters. Kramnik, Carlsen, Anand, Aronian, Nakaumura ... all these guys will probably want a front row seat! I don't count Kasparov as he is retired and your immense talent would probably go right over his head I think it is about time that the world discovered your incredible abilities!
I am an enthusiast and not a professional.
I do not want to prove anything, but to enjoy it.
Still, it is a matter of fact that people do not use all of their mental capacities.
I can confirm that playing against Stockfish DD with concept=50 is qiute difficult due to its aggressiveness and active positions opening. Anyway, after approximately 15 terrible loses, here is the first draw
,
