Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

[jp]

Without grant support, I would not be able to compensate the "test subjects". So you'll need to ask them.

My "grant proposal" consists simply of begging them.

"Please, please, Mr. Williamson..."

[Ovyron]

By the way, I don't understand your interest in tails of PVs or "precise" evaluations. Whatever Stockfish is looking at 80-120 plies from the root, it's not changing the first dozen moves of the PV. Stockfish is a chess engine. It's designed to play a "best" move in the current root position. I'm content to just let it do its thing.

I'm now going to claim that I don't believe you

It's very easy to make up scores about some supposed Stockfish dev high depth and claim it has found all the moves we've been playing unassisted. Storing the PVs and showing them after the game ends or whatever would work as proof that you have actually been doing something, but they have been conveniently discarded by you, who supposedly runs the engine all that time and only nods that the move matches with whatever we play every time, and that our moves have been in the PV all along?? Come on!

So stop with the lies or I'm going to start reporting your posts to moderation because all you're causing is game disruption, who knows if you're reaching Depth 40 and fudging the score or who knows what. We can't know because you discard the whole point of high depth

[zullil]

By the way, I don't understand your interest in tails of PVs or "precise" evaluations. Whatever Stockfish is looking at 80-120 plies from the root, it's not changing the first dozen moves of the PV. Stockfish is a chess engine. It's designed to play a "best" move in the current root position. I'm content to just let it do its thing.

I'm now going to claim that I don't believe you

It's very easy to make up scores about some supposed Stockfish dev high depth and claim it has found all the moves we've been playing unassisted. Storing the PVs and showing them after the game ends or whatever would work as proof that you have actually been doing something, but they have been conveniently discarded by you, who supposedly runs the engine all that time and only nods that the move matches with whatever we play every time, and that our moves have been in the PV all along?? Come on!

So stop with the lies or I'm going to start reporting your posts to moderation because all you're causing is game disruption, who knows if you're reaching Depth 40 and fudging the score or who knows what. We can't know because you discard the whole point of high depth

Believe what you wish. As I said, I'm running an "experiment" for my own enlightenment. My workstation is indeed running uninterrupted, and all I'm doing is entering the moves from the game as they are posted. Each evaluation I've posted has been exactly what Stockfish has shown, and every move played since g5 has been found by Stockfish, most in just seconds since Stockfish is essentially playing from its 64 GB hash until you or your opponent play something truly unusual. I'll be sure to let you know when a move in the game is not Stockfish's first choice. My sense is that you simply have no idea how strong Stockfish really is on good hardware.

[Ovyron]

My sense is that you simply have no idea how strong Stockfish really is on good hardware.

Really? So how come I've been able to find its moves with a fraction of the effort in a computer that can't go beyond 2300kn/s? This goes both ways, you know, your hardware advantage is null if I can at least match it with what I do in my slow 4core. If Stockfish dev in good hardware was as good as you think you'd have expected that I'd have played worse than it by now.

As I have said, if your computer reaches 23000kn/s or more then by using your machine I'd have found all my played moves in this game in 6 minutes or less instead of having wait for it to reach depth 60 on your CPU.

[zullil]

My sense is that you simply have no idea how strong Stockfish really is on good hardware.

Really? So how come I've been able to find its moves with a fraction of the effort in a computer that can't go beyond 2300kn/s? This goes both ways, you know, your hardware advantage is null if I can at least match it with what I do in my slow 4core. If Stockfish dev in good hardware was as good as you think you'd have expected that I'd have played worse than it by now.

As I have said, if your computer reaches 23000kn/s or more then by using your machine I'd have found all my played moves in this game in 6 minutes or less instead of having wait for it to reach depth 60 on your CPU.

If you can do what you have claimed, I will be the first to acknowledge it. We're currently on move 10. The "experiment" is still in progress. Your move, I believe.

[Ovyron]

Yup, I still found this move as best within 1 hour...

1. g4 d5 2. g5 e5 3. d4 exd4 4. Nf3 c5 5. Bg2 Ne7 6. c3 dxc3 7. Nxc3 Nbc6 8. O-O d4 9. Ne4 Ng6 10. a3

[d]r1bqkb1r/pp3ppp/2n3n1/2p3P1/3pN3/P4N2/1P2PPBP/R1BQ1RK1 b kq -

[Harvey Williamson]

Ponder hit!

[pgn]1. g4 d5 2. g5 e5 3. d4 exd4 4. Nf3 c5 5. Bg2 Ne7 6. c3 dxc3 7. Nxc3 Nbc6 8. O-O d4 9. Ne4 Ng6 10. a3 Bg4[/pgn]

[zullil]

Ponder hit!

[pgn]1. g4 d5 2. g5 e5 3. d4 exd4 4. Nf3 c5 5. Bg2 Ne7 6. c3 dxc3 7. Nxc3 Nbc6 8. O-O d4 9. Ne4 Ng6 10. a3 Bg4[/pgn]

Two more moves from Stockfish-dev's PV. Eval was at -1.47 at depth 66 before a3. Will now take about an hour to return to depth 60+ once I enter a3 and Bg4.

[EDIT] Now -1.36 at depth 50 in the current position. PV remains exactly as it has since 2. g5, at least for the next 10 moves. So far White's move selection method has performed admirably.

[EDIT] Now -1.45 at depth 55 after 15 minutes.

[Harvey Williamson]

[EDIT] Now -1.45 at depth 55 after 15 minutes.

I think white now has a few playable choices.

[zullil]

[EDIT] Now -1.45 at depth 55 after 15 minutes.

I think white now has a few playable choices.

Well, -1.43 at depth 61, after 3 hours of searching since Bg4 was entered. Same PV that Stockfish has shown for ages.