Why there is no interest in Computer with odds Vs Humans match?

[Chessqueen]

Takeback odds is an interesting idea. I play odds games against computers regularly and will have to try it.

Against a top engine, perhaps the human should not play normally and only use the takebacks when they realize they've made a mistake. Instead, we should play in a way that takes advantage of the fact that we know we'll be able to take back moves.

I suppose we still won't be able to play for a win, but how to maximize the chances of a draw? Perhaps "trying out" forcing lines and abandoning them if they seem unlikely to result in either a perpetual or a holdable simplified position is one way to go, while saving a few takebacks for blunders too.

Another funny idea is that you can use takebacks in the opening and then play the exact same move again anyway (If the engine plays several different lines and you get one you didn't prepare as much for)

Talking about takeback against an engine you might end up taking back so many times that a single game would last more than a correspondence game.

Anyway, I forgot where I read more than a year ago that in China they started experimenting giving 1 pawn odds whenever your opponent was more than 300 elo than you , only on the first and 2nd round to make it more interesting and challenging to both players, but the higher player only lose 1/2 of the normal rating that he would lose if he does not win against the player rated 300 points below him and vise versa the lower player only gain 1/2 the points that he would normally gain by beating his opponent and so on until most players would play versus other players that are closer to their own rating or below 300 elo points, in such way the level of competency average out on the first and sometimes the 2nd round of a big tournament where there are thousands of players. I believe that the USCF should start using this method in big tournaments to make it more interesting to players that are 300 and sometimes even 600 elo points above their weaker opponents and more challenging to their weaker players that will try anything to win their games.

PS: I have seen in small city where they match players that are sometimes up to 600 Elo points in difference on the first round

[lkaufman]

Takeback odds is an interesting idea. I play odds games against computers regularly and will have to try it.

Against a top engine, perhaps the human should not play normally and only use the takebacks when they realize they've made a mistake. Instead, we should play in a way that takes advantage of the fact that we know we'll be able to take back moves.

I suppose we still won't be able to play for a win, but how to maximize the chances of a draw? Perhaps "trying out" forcing lines and abandoning them if they seem unlikely to result in either a perpetual or a holdable simplified position is one way to go, while saving a few takebacks for blunders too.

Another funny idea is that you can use takebacks in the opening and then play the exact same move again anyway (If the engine plays several different lines and you get one you didn't prepare as much for)

Talking about takeback against an engine you might end up taking back so many times that a single game would last more than a correspondence game.

Anyway, I forgot where I read more than a year ago that in China they started experimenting giving 1 pawn odds whenever your opponent was more than 300 elo than you , only on the first and 2nd round to make it more interesting and challenging to both players, but the higher player only lose 1/2 of the normal rating that he would lose if he does not win against the player rated 300 points below him and vise versa the lower player only gain 1/2 the points that he would normally gain by beating his opponent and so on until most players would play versus other players that are closer to their own rating or below 300 elo points, in such way the level of competency average out on the first and sometimes the 2nd round of a big tournament where there are thousands of players. I believe that the USCF should start using this method in big tournaments to make it more interesting to players that are 300 and sometimes even 600 elo points above their weaker opponents and more challenging to their weaker players that will try anything to win their games.

PS: I have seen in small city where they match players that are sometimes up to 600 Elo points in difference on the first round

Do you have a link or any specifics regarding which pawn is removed? The a2 pawn isn't much more of a handicap than having White in normal chess, whereas the f7 pawn is worth 500 elo in komodo bullet self-play. We used to have material handicap rapid tournaments in the 1970s, maybe even into the 1980s.
Komodo won the pawn and two move match with arasan by 174 wins to 106 losses with 109 draws (+64 elo) at 20' + 10" (1 thread each). I'm now roughly doubling the time limit, to 45' + 15", for a rematch. No games done yet. I expect this will be very close.

[Chessqueen]

Takeback odds is an interesting idea. I play odds games against computers regularly and will have to try it.

Against a top engine, perhaps the human should not play normally and only use the takebacks when they realize they've made a mistake. Instead, we should play in a way that takes advantage of the fact that we know we'll be able to take back moves.

I suppose we still won't be able to play for a win, but how to maximize the chances of a draw? Perhaps "trying out" forcing lines and abandoning them if they seem unlikely to result in either a perpetual or a holdable simplified position is one way to go, while saving a few takebacks for blunders too.

Another funny idea is that you can use takebacks in the opening and then play the exact same move again anyway (If the engine plays several different lines and you get one you didn't prepare as much for)

Talking about takeback against an engine you might end up taking back so many times that a single game would last more than a correspondence game.

Anyway, I forgot where I read more than a year ago that in China they started experimenting giving 1 pawn odds whenever your opponent was more than 300 elo than you , only on the first and 2nd round to make it more interesting and challenging to both players, but the higher player only lose 1/2 of the normal rating that he would lose if he does not win against the player rated 300 points below him and vise versa the lower player only gain 1/2 the points that he would normally gain by beating his opponent and so on until most players would play versus other players that are closer to their own rating or below 300 elo points, in such way the level of competency average out on the first and sometimes the 2nd round of a big tournament where there are thousands of players. I believe that the USCF should start using this method in big tournaments to make it more interesting to players that are 300 and sometimes even 600 elo points above their weaker opponents and more challenging to their weaker players that will try anything to win their games.

PS: I have seen in small city where they match players that are sometimes up to 600 Elo points in difference on the first round

Do you have a link or any specifics regarding which pawn is removed? The a2 pawn isn't much more of a handicap than having White in normal chess, whereas the f7 pawn is worth 500 elo in komodo bullet self-play. We used to have material handicap rapid tournaments in the 1970s, maybe even into the 1980s.
Komodo won the pawn and two move match with arasan by 174 wins to 106 losses with 109 draws (+64 elo) at 20' + 10" (1 thread each). I'm now roughly doubling the time limit, to 45' + 15", for a rematch. No games done yet. I expect this will be very close.

That is very interesting what Komodo did to Arasan, you should create a Youtube page so we can all watch this as it happens. The real question is can Nakamura beat that version of Arasan playing without any odds ?

I forgot where exactly I read this all that it said is that the Chinese organizer followed an old practice which was used during the 19th century in which the stronger player takes Black and removes the pawn at F7.

[lkaufman]

Takeback odds is an interesting idea. I play odds games against computers regularly and will have to try it.

Against a top engine, perhaps the human should not play normally and only use the takebacks when they realize they've made a mistake. Instead, we should play in a way that takes advantage of the fact that we know we'll be able to take back moves.

I suppose we still won't be able to play for a win, but how to maximize the chances of a draw? Perhaps "trying out" forcing lines and abandoning them if they seem unlikely to result in either a perpetual or a holdable simplified position is one way to go, while saving a few takebacks for blunders too.

Another funny idea is that you can use takebacks in the opening and then play the exact same move again anyway (If the engine plays several different lines and you get one you didn't prepare as much for)

Talking about takeback against an engine you might end up taking back so many times that a single game would last more than a correspondence game.

Anyway, I forgot where I read more than a year ago that in China they started experimenting giving 1 pawn odds whenever your opponent was more than 300 elo than you , only on the first and 2nd round to make it more interesting and challenging to both players, but the higher player only lose 1/2 of the normal rating that he would lose if he does not win against the player rated 300 points below him and vise versa the lower player only gain 1/2 the points that he would normally gain by beating his opponent and so on until most players would play versus other players that are closer to their own rating or below 300 elo points, in such way the level of competency average out on the first and sometimes the 2nd round of a big tournament where there are thousands of players. I believe that the USCF should start using this method in big tournaments to make it more interesting to players that are 300 and sometimes even 600 elo points above their weaker opponents and more challenging to their weaker players that will try anything to win their games.

PS: I have seen in small city where they match players that are sometimes up to 600 Elo points in difference on the first round

Do you have a link or any specifics regarding which pawn is removed? The a2 pawn isn't much more of a handicap than having White in normal chess, whereas the f7 pawn is worth 500 elo in komodo bullet self-play. We used to have material handicap rapid tournaments in the 1970s, maybe even into the 1980s.
Komodo won the pawn and two move match with arasan by 174 wins to 106 losses with 109 draws (+64 elo) at 20' + 10" (1 thread each). I'm now roughly doubling the time limit, to 45' + 15", for a rematch. No games done yet. I expect this will be very close.

That is very interesting what Komodo did to Arasan, you should create a Youtube page so we can all watch this as it happens. The real question is can Nakamura beat that version of Arasan playing without any odds ?

I forgot where exactly I read this all that it said is that the Chinese organizer followed an old practice which was used during the 19th century in which the stronger player takes Black and removes the pawn at F7.

Thanks, that makes sense, the f7 pawn handicap is worth around 300 elo between strong human players, like maybe 2500 vs 2200. In my longer tc match, 45' + 15", Komodo again beat Arasan at pawn and two moves, but this time just by 14 elo, half the error margin (195 wins, 176 losses, 124 draws). So somewhere around or a bit beyond this tc, Arasan 18 becomes too strong for Komodo at f7 and two moves, one thread each. I suppose this means that at 2 hours plus 30 seconds the proper handicap would be just f7 pawn, without the second White move.

[Jhoravi]

I believe the most even and interesting match is 1 Knight Odds for the computer but the DRAW is a win for the computer

[lkaufman]

I believe the most even and interesting match is 1 Knight Odds for the computer but the DRAW is a win for the computer

Yes, with that rule our knight odds match with FM John Meyer (in normal chess, 45' + 15") would have been drawn, since he won two and drew two. But we're a long way from being able to give those odds to a strong GM at a slow pace like that; maybe in slow blitz or fast rapid (say 10' + 2") it might be possible with 2600 level GMs, not with Hikaru or MVL. I like the idea of matches where every game is a win for one side or the other.

[Chessqueen]

I believe the most even and interesting match is 1 Knight Odds for the computer but the DRAW is a win for the computer

Yes, with that rule our knight odds match with FM John Meyer (in normal chess, 45' + 15") would have been drawn, since he won two and drew two. But we're a long way from being able to give those odds to a strong GM at a slow pace like that; maybe in slow blitz or fast rapid (say 10' + 2") it might be possible with 2600 level GMs, not with Hikaru or MVL. I like the idea of matches where every game is a win for one side or the other.

In the Mid 1800s, there were no chess ratings. Players were generally classified based on how much handicap they needed from the top players to have fairly even chances. But now that we have rating system we can give Exchange odds like removing the Rook from a1 and the Knight from b8. I believe tha Komodo can give this odds to IM Eugene Meyer. Or even a Knight odds

[Nordlandia]

Chessqueen: based on earlier matches with Nakamura, knight for rook is not enough. Exchange + move or exchange + pawn is doable today.

Komodo W, Nakamura Black.
[d]1rbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPPP/1NBQKBNR w Kk -

[lkaufman]

I believe the most even and interesting match is 1 Knight Odds for the computer but the DRAW is a win for the computer

Yes, with that rule our knight odds match with FM John Meyer (in normal chess, 45' + 15") would have been drawn, since he won two and drew two. But we're a long way from being able to give those odds to a strong GM at a slow pace like that; maybe in slow blitz or fast rapid (say 10' + 2") it might be possible with 2600 level GMs, not with Hikaru or MVL. I like the idea of matches where every game is a win for one side or the other.

In the Mid 1800s, there were no chess ratings. Players were generally classified based on how much handicap they needed from the top players to have fairly even chances. But now that we have rating system we can give Exchange odds like removing the Rook from a1 and the Knight from b8. I believe tha Komodo can give this odds to IM Eugene Meyer. Or even a Knight odds

We have played about a dozen serious (45' + 15") games with GMs at rook for knight or at rook and move for knight odds, and so far Komodo never lost a game, roughly half draws, half Komodo wins. It seems that rook for knight is slightly less than f7 odds, and rook and move for knight is slightly less than f7 and two move odds. We gave rook and pawn (a2, since there is no rook there to use the file) for knight twice, beating IM Danny Rensch but losing (at 10' + 2") to MVL. That one seems to be between pawn and two moves and pawn and three moves. We didn't try exchange and pawn and move.
By a remarkable coincidence, we had an all-human match at rook for knight odds nearly forty years ago, at standard time limit, between two teams. The team with the knight was all strong masters, the team with the rook was rated around 2000. The result was a narrow victory for the 2000 rated team, by one game if memory serves. I recall that it was effectively decided by an early blunder by the top rated player on the master team. The remarkable coincidence is that this player was ... IM Eugene Meyer!
Exchange odds, with or without the "a" pawn added and regardless of color, is a much purer form of material handicap than pawn and move or moves. Giving the f7 pawn really changes the game in White's favor due to king safety issues, while giving other pawns helps the development of the side removing the pawn. So I do like Exchange odds.

[Nordlandia]

What about removing rook + two minor pieces for queen. Or remove rook and bishop for queen (no bishop pair for engine if possible).

[d]rnb1kbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RN1QKB2 w Qkq - 0 1

[d]rn1qkb2/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNB1KBNR w KQq - 0 1

Alternatively this

[d]1n1qk1nr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNB1KBNR w KQq -

[d]rnb1kbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/1N1QK1NR w Kkq - 0 1

Or maybe the bizarre (human playing black.

[d]rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/2pp4/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq -