1.g4 opening is losing?

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Dann Corbit, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Ovyron » Sun Apr 05, 2020 7:19 pm

jp wrote:
Sun Apr 05, 2020 8:16 am
If playing a game is so important, then so far you have only two pieces of data on this forum to base your opinion on. Yet you talk about "everything I've seen", etc.
I'm talking about the mountain of analysis that I've accumulated, that would be enough to beat Zenmastur easily (unless 1.g4 draws!) Now, I don't know how much that matters, so let's also say that I'd be able to beat Harvey Williamson easily.

With the laughable amount of analysis I had back in October, I wouldn't have been able to beat anyone.

Playing a game is so important because of the amount of analysis that we accumulate (for comparison, what CBDN has on 1.g4 is less than what I had on October!) after the games are over, not about data points (where two games mean nothing).

In theory, someone could produce that same analysis without needing to play a game. In practice, they never have to commit to a move, so they could say a position is draw, or another is won by black, conclusively, even if on an actual game they'd lose the former or failed to win the latter. Only an actual game can show that.

Exa65536
Posts: 7
Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2018 4:28 am
Full name: Alexa Stevens

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Exa65536 » Fri Apr 17, 2020 2:33 pm

Ovyron wrote:
Sun Apr 05, 2020 2:57 am
Measuring by nodes does not convince me, though, I'd still like to see a draw against Depth 39 (on Game 1 I was still able to produce potential drawing lines against Depth 38, up until the very end, so D39 is where the line could be drawn and it'd be enough to defeat any defense.)
Drawing line versus depth39, as requested

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 4410
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Ovyron » Sun May 03, 2020 3:38 am

Exa65536 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 2:33 pm
Drawing line versus depth39, as requested
Thanks!

So now we have a line that Depth 60 can't defend and yours where depth 39 can't win. The truth is somewhere in the middle, and I wonder if this path (one finds a line depth 40 can't win, then one where depth 41 can't win) could lead to the truth (there's some depth that is enough to beat any defense. Unfortunately we reach a "game takes an entire month" limit very soon...)

Zenmastur
Posts: 919
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 6:28 am

Re: A small test...

Post by Zenmastur » Fri May 08, 2020 3:15 am

Zenmastur wrote:
Mon Feb 10, 2020 8:52 am
...
... snip snip ...
...

Could you do a small test analysis for us? Something not too difficult like analyze this position to mate:



No outside help please!
...
... snip snip ...
...
Before I forget, the origin of the position in the test was from my analysis of the game Tal-Koblenc 1957




After 31... Rd7



The best line of play appears to be:

Code: Select all

( [Stockfish 030520 64 POPCNT] 74:M29 32.g5 Qg3 33.g6 Qxe3+ 34.Kb1 Qe1+ 35.Rxe1 Bxe1 36.Nxa7 axb5 37.Nxc8 d3 38.cxd3 Bd2 39.Nd6 Bh6 40.Ne8 Kxe8 41.Qxg8+ Ke7 42.Rxg7+ Bxg7 43.Qxg7+ Kd6 44.Qf8+ Ke5 45.g7 Rxg7 46.Qxg7+ Kd6 47.Qb7 Kc5 48.Qe7+ Kd5 49.Qd7+ Ke5 50.Qxb5+ Kf6 51.a4 f4 52.a5 f3 53.Qc5 f2 54.Qxf2+ Ke7 55.a6 e5 56.a7 e4 57.a8=Q e3 58.Qxe3+ Kd6 59.Qd8+ Kc6 60.Qeb6# )
But this is way too easy to find. The second best move, 32.gxf5, leads to the test position after 32... Qg3 33.R7h3 Qd6 34.Qxg8+ Kxg8 35.fxe6 Qxe6
we now have this:



Regards,

Zenmastur
Only 2 defining forces have ever offered to die for you.....Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

Paloma
Posts: 1003
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 8:07 pm

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Paloma » Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:07 am

zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:51 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:13 pm
jp wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:03 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 3:51 pm
Right. Is there a handy example of a 7-man position that is a theoretical draw for the side to move, but for which only one or two non-obvious moves hold the draw?
I'm interested in finding such positions too, e.g. the simplest possible endgame positions that are too hard for computers alone or even centaurs. They'd probably need to be at least 5-man, I guess.


Apparently only one move wins. Good luck to all the centaurs. And to all the engines without endgame tables.
Stockfish (with 6-man tables) has Qf5 with eval +0.38 at depth 54. Wrong move, and eval is off by infinity! :D

Clearly I need to find a "centaur" to help.
1.Kg2 ! (only move) leads to mate in 542
No Engine will find that.

mmt
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:33 am
Full name: .

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by mmt » Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:26 pm

Exa65536 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 2:33 pm
Drawing line versus depth39, as requested
Cool! I'll run some analysis at long time controls to get some possible alternatives for black.

Uri Blass
Posts: 8923
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:37 pm
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Uri Blass » Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:56 pm

Paloma wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:07 am
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:51 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:13 pm
jp wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:03 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 3:51 pm
Right. Is there a handy example of a 7-man position that is a theoretical draw for the side to move, but for which only one or two non-obvious moves hold the draw?
I'm interested in finding such positions too, e.g. the simplest possible endgame positions that are too hard for computers alone or even centaurs. They'd probably need to be at least 5-man, I guess.


Apparently only one move wins. Good luck to all the centaurs. And to all the engines without endgame tables.
Stockfish (with 6-man tables) has Qf5 with eval +0.38 at depth 54. Wrong move, and eval is off by infinity! :D

Clearly I need to find a "centaur" to help.
1.Kg2 ! (only move) leads to mate in 542
No Engine will find that.
mate in 542 means a draw by the 50 move rule.
50 move rule is part of chess.

mmt
Posts: 341
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2019 6:33 am
Full name: .

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by mmt » Wed Sep 09, 2020 10:46 pm

Exa65536 wrote:
Fri Apr 17, 2020 2:33 pm

Drawing line versus depth39, as requested
SF NNUE slightly prefers 8... h6 to 8... c6 from the start. Do you have a drawing continuation after this move?


lkaufman
Posts: 4483
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 am
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by lkaufman » Thu Sep 10, 2020 1:24 am

I had the Grob position after 1.g4 played out ten times with ten of the best engines (six different SF NNUEs, 2 of the best Lc0s, the best regular SF and Komodo) on 7 threads at 4' + 2", and Black won every single game, no draws! I don't really believe we can prove by analysis whether it's a win for Black or a draw, but statistically it appears to be quite losing, worse than much more obviously losing opening positions. Usually statistics done this way are a pretty good indication of whether an opening position is won or drawn, assuming we're not talking about some deep tactical opening line where one must find a string of difficult moves to win or draw.
Komodo rules!

Vinvin
Posts: 4864
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:40 am
Full name: Vincent Lejeune

Re: 1.g4 opening is losing?

Post by Vinvin » Thu Sep 10, 2020 2:58 am

Uri Blass wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 1:56 pm
Paloma wrote:
Wed Sep 09, 2020 11:07 am
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:51 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:13 pm
jp wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 4:03 pm
zullil wrote:
Thu Feb 06, 2020 3:51 pm
Right. Is there a handy example of a 7-man position that is a theoretical draw for the side to move, but for which only one or two non-obvious moves hold the draw?
I'm interested in finding such positions too, e.g. the simplest possible endgame positions that are too hard for computers alone or even centaurs. They'd probably need to be at least 5-man, I guess.


Apparently only one move wins. Good luck to all the centaurs. And to all the engines without endgame tables.
Stockfish (with 6-man tables) has Qf5 with eval +0.38 at depth 54. Wrong move, and eval is off by infinity! :D

Clearly I need to find a "centaur" to help.
1.Kg2 ! (only move) leads to mate in 542
No Engine will find that.
mate in 542 means a draw by the 50 move rule.
50 move rule is part of chess.
There's no draw by the 50 move rule for this position.
https://lichess.org/analysis/6N1/3n4/3k ... _w_-_-_0_1
Click on the book to see the Syzygy DTZ.

Post Reply