correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

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.
lkaufman
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 am
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by lkaufman » Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:38 pm

towforce wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:00 pm
I have lived through several era's ending: this feels like the beginning of the end of the computer chess era to me.
Well, it feels like the end of computer chess from the normal start position with no restrictions or rule changes, but computer chess has already adapted by forcing bad openings in most events. As long as the forced openings are near the win/draw line and as long as each engine plays White once, the stronger engine is quite likely to win a two game match, and computer chess can continue to evolve. We just have to accept that the initial position with current rules is just too drawish for top level engine play. If we stipulate certain openings it's still chess in my opinion.
Komodo rules!

Krzysztof Grzelak
Posts: 1092
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 10:47 am

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by Krzysztof Grzelak » Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:50 pm

lkaufman wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:38 pm
Well, it feels like the end of computer chess from the normal start position with no restrictions or rule changes, but computer chess has already adapted by forcing bad openings in most events. As long as the forced openings are near the win/draw line and as long as each engine plays White once, the stronger engine is quite likely to win a two game match, and computer chess can continue to evolve. We just have to accept that the initial position with current rules is just too drawish for top level engine play. If we stipulate certain openings it's still chess in my opinion.
It is necessary to play without no books debiutowych !!!.

User avatar
towforce
Posts: 11017
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:57 pm
Location: Birmingham UK

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by towforce » Mon Mar 08, 2021 11:18 pm

lkaufman wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:38 pm
towforce wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:00 pm
I have lived through several era's ending: this feels like the beginning of the end of the computer chess era to me.
Well, it feels like the end of computer chess from the normal start position with no restrictions or rule changes, but computer chess has already adapted by forcing bad openings in most events. As long as the forced openings are near the win/draw line and as long as each engine plays White once, the stronger engine is quite likely to win a two game match, and computer chess can continue to evolve. We just have to accept that the initial position with current rules is just too drawish for top level engine play. If we stipulate certain openings it's still chess in my opinion.

Thank you for responding.

Forced openings seem to me to be directly equivalent to new starting positions. If you're happy to accept that this is still chess, then I am as well.

The problem is that we're only in the early days of using machine learning technology to help select chess moves, but we're already getting close to the limits of chess as a game.

Considering how long ago chess was devised, it is surprising to me that chess has held out as long as it has. The popularity of chess might have an element of survivorship bias to it - it may well have remained popular mainly because nobody has yet devised relatively straightforward ways to guarantee the best results yet, as has happened in many other games. However, given that we're likely to see chess engines continue to improve, and that a wristwatch today (e.g. Apple Watch or Galaxy Watch 3) running from a tiny, low powered rechargeable battery very likely could, without superhuman effort, be cajoled into playing better chess than the big, power-hungry Deeper Blue computer that beat Gary Kasparov in 1997, the long term trend is likely to be that before too long, chess computers will be able to quickly and easily select optimum moves most of the time.

Meaning: they will normally select winning moves in winning positions and moves that don't lose in drawing positions.

Changing the opening position might buy some time, but it looks to me as though a combination of improving hardware and software is now beginning to pass through the limits of the game of chess.
Writing is the antidote to confusion.
It's not "how smart you are", it's "how are you smart".

lkaufman
Posts: 5004
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 5:15 am
Location: Maryland USA
Contact:

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by lkaufman » Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:27 am

towforce wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 11:18 pm
lkaufman wrote:
Mon Mar 08, 2021 10:38 pm
towforce wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 8:00 pm
I have lived through several era's ending: this feels like the beginning of the end of the computer chess era to me.
Well, it feels like the end of computer chess from the normal start position with no restrictions or rule changes, but computer chess has already adapted by forcing bad openings in most events. As long as the forced openings are near the win/draw line and as long as each engine plays White once, the stronger engine is quite likely to win a two game match, and computer chess can continue to evolve. We just have to accept that the initial position with current rules is just too drawish for top level engine play. If we stipulate certain openings it's still chess in my opinion.

Thank you for responding.

Forced openings seem to me to be directly equivalent to new starting positions. If you're happy to accept that this is still chess, then I am as well.

The problem is that we're only in the early days of using machine learning technology to help select chess moves, but we're already getting close to the limits of chess as a game.

Considering how long ago chess was devised, it is surprising to me that chess has held out as long as it has. The popularity of chess might have an element of survivorship bias to it - it may well have remained popular mainly because nobody has yet devised relatively straightforward ways to guarantee the best results yet, as has happened in many other games. However, given that we're likely to see chess engines continue to improve, and that a wristwatch today (e.g. Apple Watch or Galaxy Watch 3) running from a tiny, low powered rechargeable battery very likely could, without superhuman effort, be cajoled into playing better chess than the big, power-hungry Deeper Blue computer that beat Gary Kasparov in 1997, the long term trend is likely to be that before too long, chess computers will be able to quickly and easily select optimum moves most of the time.

Meaning: they will normally select winning moves in winning positions and moves that don't lose in drawing positions.

Changing the opening position might buy some time, but it looks to me as though a combination of improving hardware and software is now beginning to pass through the limits of the game of chess.
Yes, "before too long, chess computers will be able to quickly and easily select optimum moves most of the time." The key is that as long as the chosen opening positions are near the edge of the win/draw line, this won't be the case even with a million to one speedup from current hardware. If the future engine can pick the best move with say a standard deviation of 2% in win probability, as long as the position is within 1% or so of the win/draw line the results should be roughly half wins for White and half draws, and if one engine has a 1.5% SD while the other has a 2% SD it will make a serious plus score. In other words, as computers get faster and stronger, it will be necessary to be more careful to select positions very close to this win/draw line, but as long as the selection is done right computer chess will still be interesting and progress will be significant. Whether the chess public accepts such start positions as valid chess contests remains to be seen. It may become necessary to rate two game matches (from the same position) as one game rather than to rate each game separately, but that is a technical detail. I note that Stockfish already quotes results in terms of such game pairs.
Komodo rules!

carldaman
Posts: 2129
Joined: Sat Jun 02, 2012 12:13 am

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by carldaman » Tue Mar 09, 2021 12:27 pm

Forced openings is a far better option than draw death.

User avatar
Master Om
Posts: 436
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 9:57 am
Location: INDIA

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by Master Om » Tue Mar 09, 2021 4:30 pm

MikeB wrote:
Sat Mar 06, 2021 10:11 pm
Master Om wrote:
Sun Jan 31, 2021 5:08 pm
Check this position.

[D]6rk/pp1bbr2/3p1n1q/PPpPp1pp/2P1Pp1n/R4P1P/4BNPN/1Q2BRK1 b - - 0 33

This is from my own game. This came out from a KID opening.
Just Check the eval here. Here my opponent who is an OTB GM played 33.Qb1
This is a corr game and u can see how helpless engines are here.

Now after deep analysis I found 33...Nxg2! can be played and then Bxh3!
But check the eval and the moves suggested...

[D]6rk/pp1bbr2/3p1n1q/PPpPp1pp/2P1Pp1n/R4P1P/4BNPN/1Q2BRK1 b - - 0 33

33... Nxg2 34. Kxg2 Bxh3+ 35. Nxh3 g4 36. fxg4 hxg4 37. Bxg4 Nxg4 38. Kh1 Rfg7
39. Nxg4 Rxg4 40. Qd1 Qh7 41. Qe2 Bh4 42. Bxh4 Rxh4 43. Rff3 Qg6 44. Ra1 Qh6
45. Raa3 Qg6 46. Ra1 Rg7 47. Qf2 Qh7 48. Raa3 Kg8 49. Qe1 Kf7 50. Qf2 Rhg4 51.
Qe3 Ke7 52. Qe1 *

If Black gives up 2 rooks for the queen Nxf4!! after doubling of rooks in f file makes the game draw.
But engines dont get it.

Now after 33...Nfg7 34.Nfg4!! hxg4 35. fxg4 the position is interesting.
See how no engines show a valid way to play this position.
After Bxh4 and Bf3 there is no way for black to penetrate white's camp.
Very nice position , my current net in process.
NNUE evaluation using C:\nnue-gui.1.5\reinforce-network\final\nn-2c35355d9b61.nnue enabled

Code: Select all

dep	score	nodes	time	(not shown:  tbhits	knps	seldep)
 46	+0.05 	2.03G	5:10.29	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rg3+ Kf7 Rh3 Qe6 Bh4 Bf8 a6 bxa6 Bf2 Qa2 Be1 Qa4 Rh4 Qxb5+ 
 45	+0.05 	1.80G	4:34.00	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rg3+ Kf7 Rh3 Qe6 Bh4 Bf8 a6 bxa6 Bf2 Qa2 Be1 Qa4 Rh4 Qxb5+ 
 44	+0.05 	1.78G	4:30.97	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rf3 Qe6 Re3 Kf7 Re2 Ke8 a6 b6 Kg2 Qg4+ Kh1 Qa4 Rg2 Qxb5
 43	+0.05 	1.78G	4:30.12	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rf3 Qe6 Re3 Kf7 Re2 Ke8 b6 axb6 axb6 Qg6 Ndf3 Qd3
 42	+0.05 	1.77G	4:29.63	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rf3 Qe6 Re3 Qa2 Ne2 Kf6 b6 Ke6 bxa7 Qxa5 a8=Q
 41	+0.05 	1.77G	4:29.26	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qh6 Rf3 Qe6 Re3 Kf7 Ngf3 Qa2 Ke2 Qa4 Kf1 Ke6 Re4 Qxb5+ Kg2 Qxa5
 40	+0.05 	1.76G	4:27.27	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Kg7 Nf3 Kf7 Nc3 Qc4+ Kf2 Qe6 b6 axb6 a6 bxa6 Re2 Kf8 Ra2 Qc4
 39	+0.04 	1.76G	4:26.90	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Kg7 Nf3 Qa2 Nd2 Qa1 Nc3 Bg5 Nb3 Qb2 Rg3 Qxb3 Rxg5+ Kf6
 38	+0.05 	1.75G	4:26.44	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Kg7 Nf3 Qa2 Nd2 Qe6 b6 a6 Re4 Kf7 Kg2 Qa2 Nc4 Qc2
 37	+0.05 	1.75G	4:26.31	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Qa2 Ne3 Rxe3 fxe3 Rf3 Rhg7 Qe2 Rg2 Qxg2 Rxg2 Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf1 Qxe4 Ng1 Qxc4+ Ne2 Qxd5 Rxe3 Qh1+ Ng1 Kg7 Nf3 Qh7 Nd2 Qc2 b6 axb6 a6 bxa6 Kg2 Kf7 Rg3 Ke6
 36	+0.04 	402.4M	1:02.44	Nxf3+ gxf3 Bxh3 Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Kh1 Rg3 Raf3 Qxh3+ Qh2 Qxh2+ Kxh2 Rg2+ Kh1 R8g5 Rh3+ Kg7 Rd1 R2g4 Kh2 Kg8 Re1 Rg2+ Kh1 Rg7 Rf1 b6 Rh2 R2g3
 35	+0.04 	330.3M	0:52.42	Nxf3+ gxf3 Bxh3 Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Kh1 Rg3 Raf3 Qxh3+ Qh2 Qxh2+ Kxh2 Rg2+ Kh1 R8g5 Rh3+ Kg7 Rd1 R2g4 Kh2 Kg8 Re1 Rg2+ Kh1 b6 axb6 axb6 Ra3
 34	+0.04 	305.4M	0:49.03	Nxf3+ gxf3 Bxh3 Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Kh1 Rg3 Raf3 Qxh3+ Qh2 Qxh2+ Kxh2 Rg2+ Kh1 R8g5 Rh3+ Kg7 Rd1 R2g4 Kh2 Kg8 Re1 Rg2+ Kh1 b6 axb6 axb6 Ra3
 33	+0.04 	172.8M	0:30.45	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Rff3 Qh7 Qb1 Rg4 Ra2 Qh5 Qf1 Rg1 Qf2 R8g7 Rxf4 exf4 Qxf4 Qg4 Qxg4 R1xg4 Nf2 Rg2+ Kh1 a6
 32	+0.04 	136.9M	0:25.45	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Rff3 Qh7 Qb1 Rg4 Ra2 R8g7 Qf1 Rg1 Qxg1 Rxg1 Kxg1 Qxe4 Raa3 Qd4+ Kg2 Kg8 Ng5 e4 Rxf4 Qb2+ Kf1 Qxa3
 31	+0.04 	121.2M	0:23.24	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 Nxf4 exf4 Rh1 gxf3+ Kxf3 Rfg7 Kf2 Rg2+ Kf1 Qg6 Bf3 Rxh2 Rxh2 Qg1+ Ke2 Qxh2+ Bf2 Ng4 Qg1 Qxg1 Bxg1 Kh7 Bxg4 hxg4 Kf2 a6 bxa6 Bh4+ Kf1 bxa6 Ke2 Bg3 Kf1
 31	+0.03!	113.4M	0:22.18	Nxg2!
 31	 -0.04?	103.9M	0:20.80	Nxg2 Kxg2?
 30	+0.03 	98.6M  	0:19.90	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Qh7 Nxg4 Rxg4 Qd3 Rfg7 Ra2 Bh4 Rh2 Bg3 Bxg3 fxg3 Rf8+ Rg8 Qf3 gxh2 Rxg8+ Qxg8 Nf2 Rg1+ Kxh2 Ra1 Qh3+ Qh7 a6 b6 Qxh7+ Kxh7
 29	+0.03 	83.7M  	0:17.44	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Qh7 Nxg4 Rxg4 Qd3 Rfg7 Ra2 Bh4 Rh2 Bg3 Bxg3 fxg3 Rf8+ Rg8 Qf3 gxh2 Rxg8+ Qxg8 Nf2 Rg1+ Kxh2 Ra1 Qh3+ Qh7 Qxh7+ Kxh7 Kh3 Ra4
 28	+0.02 	74.2M  	0:15.89	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Qh7 Nxg4 Rxg4 Qd3 Rfg7 Ra2 Bh4 Rh2 Bg3 Bxg3 Rxg3 Qc2 Qxh3 Rxh3+ Rxh3+ Qh2 Rxh2+ Kxh2 Rg3 Rg1 Rd3 Rg6 Re3 a6 b6
 27	+0.03 	71.0M  	0:15.36	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Rh7 Nxg4 Rxg4 Qc2 Bh4 Qe2 Rhg7 Bxh4 Rxh4 Rg1 Rxh3+ Rxh3 Qxh3+ Qh2 Rh7 Qxh3 Rxh3+ Kg2 Re3 Kf2 Kh7 b6 a6 Rg4 Rxe4 Rh4+ Kg7 Rg4+ Kh8
 26	+0.06 	64.8M  	0:14.46	Nxg2 Kxg2 Bxh3+ Nxh3 g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Kh1 Nxh2 Kxh2 Rfg7 Qc2 Bh4 Bxh4 Qxh4 Rff3 Rg4 Qf2 Qh7 Qf1 Rg2+ Qxg2 Rxg2+ Kxg2 Qg6+ Kf2 Qxe4
 25	+0.07!	52.9M  	0:12.78	Nxg2!
 25	  0.00!	45.5M  	0:11.55	g4!
 24	 -0.09 	27.5M  	0:07.99	g4 fxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 Nh5 Bd2 Qf8 Qd3 Ng3 Rxg3 fxg3 Qxg3 Ng6 Nh3 Rf7 Rxf7 Qxf7 Nf3 Kg7 Kh1 Bh4 Nxh4
 23	 -0.09 	22.6M  	0:06.98	g4 fxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 Nh5 Bd2 Qf8 Re1 Ng3 Qd3 Nxe2+ Qxe2 Ng6 Rxh7+ Kxh7 Rf1 Bh4 Be1 Bxf2+ Qxf2 b6 Kh1 Ne7 Qa2
 22	 -0.09 	21.3M  	0:06.65	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Bxg4 hxg4 f3 Nxf3 Nxf3+ Rxf3 Rh7 Rh3 Qg5 Qb3 Rxh3 Qxh3+ Kg7 b6 axb6 Qb3 Nxg4 Nd1 Nf6 Qxb6 Qc1 Qxb7
 21	 -0.08 	12.8M  	0:04.43	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nfxg4 Qg6 Bxh4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxh4 Bd1 f3 Bxf3 Qg5 Be2 Rxf1+ Qxf1 Qd2 Nh2 Bd8 a6 bxa6 Ng4 Bxg4
 20	 -0.09 	12.3M  	0:04.28	g4 fxg4 Rh7 Qb2 hxg4 Nhxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 Bxg4 f3 Bd2 fxg2 Rf2 Qg7 Qb1 Bg5 Be6 Bxd2 Bxg8 Qxg8
 19	 -0.10 	6.57M  	0:02.34	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nfxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 Bxg4 Nxg4 Qh5 Rf2 Rxg4 hxg4 Qxg4 Qc2 f3 Bd2 Kg8 Qd3 a6 bxa6
 18	 -0.10 	5.05M  	0:01.85	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Bxg4 hxg4 f3 g3 Rh7 Qb3 Ng2 Nxf3 Nxe1 Rxe1 Nxg4 Kg2 Nxf2 Qa4
 17	 -0.11 	4.15M  	0:01.56	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Bxg4 Bxg4 Nfxg4 Nxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 Qg7 b6 a6 Qb2 f3 Qc2 fxg2 Rf2
 16	 -0.10 	3.98M  	0:01.51	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nhxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 f3 Bxf3 Qe3+ Rf2 Nxf3+ Rxf3 Qd4 b6 Qxc4
 15	 -0.12 	2.04M  	0:00.87	g4 fxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 Nh5 Qb3 Qg6 a6 Ng3 Rxg3 bxa6 bxa6 fxg3
 14	 -0.12 	1.44M  	0:00.66	g4 fxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 f3 gxf3 Qe3 Qc2 Ng6 b6 Rxh3 bxa7 Rg3+ Kh1
 13	 -0.12 	1.35M  	0:00.62	g4 fxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Rh7 Rh3 Nh5 Qb3 Ng3 Rxg3 fxg3 Qxg3
 12	 -0.12 	939498	0:00.43	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nhxg4 Nxg4 hxg4 a6 Qa2 Kh7 Bd2 axb5 cxb5
 11	 -0.12 	335788	0:00.16	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nhxg4 Nxg4 hxg4 Qg6 a6 bxa6 b6 axb6 Rxa6
 10	 -0.12 	130104	0:00.06	g4 Nhxg4 hxg4 hxg4 Nxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 a6 Rh7 Rb3
  9	 -0.11 	57418  	0:00.03	g4 fxg4 hxg4 Nhxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 Qg5 a6 bxa6 bxa6
  8	 -0.12 	37143  	0:00.02	g4 fxg4 Nxg4 Bxg4 hxg4 Nhxg4 Bxg4 a6
  7	+0.13 	7124    	0:00.01	a6 b6 Bd8 Bd1 Ng6
  6	 -0.13 	5342    	0:00.01	a6 b6 Bd8 Bd1 Ng6 Ra1
  5	+0.13 	1648    	0:00.00	a6 g4 Ra8 gxh5
  4	 -0.13 	1028    	0:00.00	Nxg2 Kxg2 Rd8 b6
  3	+0.14 	319      	0:00.00	a6 bxa6 bxa6
  2	+0.51 	199      	0:00.00	Bd8 a6
  1	+0.70 	57        	0:00.00	Rff8
Excellent Eval....
Always Expect the Unexpected

User avatar
cdani
Posts: 2200
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:24 am
Location: Andorra
Contact:

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by cdani » Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:01 pm

lkaufman wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:27 am
... The key is that as long as the chosen opening positions are near the edge of the win/draw line, this won't be the case even with a million to one speedup from current hardware.
I hope those positions can be found/provoked by future engines because they understand chess much better than actual ones, and not because they speculate.

Thomas A. Anderson
Posts: 27
Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2016 5:57 pm

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by Thomas A. Anderson » Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:42 pm

cdani wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:01 pm
lkaufman wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:27 am
... The key is that as long as the chosen opening positions are near the edge of the win/draw line, this won't be the case even with a million to one speedup from current hardware.
I hope those positions can be found/provoked by future engines because they understand chess much better than actual ones, and not because they speculate.
Using tools/engines to find test/borderlin postions for the same tools/engines smells like catch22.
cu

User avatar
Ozymandias
Posts: 1345
Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 12:30 am

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by Ozymandias » Fri Mar 12, 2021 6:20 pm

Maybe because it is, Roland. Maybe because it is.

User avatar
cdani
Posts: 2200
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 9:24 am
Location: Andorra
Contact:

Re: correspondence chess in the age of NNUE

Post by cdani » Fri Mar 12, 2021 7:41 pm

Thomas A. Anderson wrote:
Fri Mar 12, 2021 4:42 pm
cdani wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 7:01 pm
lkaufman wrote:
Tue Mar 09, 2021 3:27 am
... The key is that as long as the chosen opening positions are near the edge of the win/draw line, this won't be the case even with a million to one speedup from current hardware.
I hope those positions can be found/provoked by future engines because they understand chess much better than actual ones, and not because they speculate.
Using tools/engines to find test/borderlin postions for the same tools/engines smells like catch22.
I mean, you know that an engine plays statistically. Statistically is different than perfect. Stockfish cannot say if following 30 straigth quiet moves there is something to win because there is not statistict knowledge inside it to be able to follow such moves. A future engine maybe will be able to, so it will find positions that maybe are not wining, but are wining against current stockfish because it cannot understand them.

Post Reply