TCEC21 is over

[Kanizsa]

The victory of Stockfish 14 over Lc0 69626 is fully deserved.

The concreteness of play through precise processes of calculation of the variants, which the Alpha-Beta algorithm allows, is better for sure than the "fuzzy" and "promising" lines as Lco is able to calculate through PUCT algorithm.

In any case, the final result has determined by openings that has scarce strategic value: too many openings had imbalanced tactics just at the exit of the book lines.

The final result 19 to 7 is too liar as regard the actual value of the two programs, even regardless of the Lco ghastly time management. (Stockfish time management was fantastic, he never played the first move out of the book too quickly)

During the training of AlphaZero, and presumibly Lc0 too, we know from Nature paper that Sicilian is immediately discarded, so Lco has so little experience of autoplay in this opening.

I am confident about one thing. In case of as many Spanish as the Sicilians had been played (how many were played? I counted only 2 Tchigorin against about 30 Sicilians) the final result would be tight.

Or, more trivially, if Sadler and Noomen had selected a number of 1 e4-e5 openings equal to the number of 1 e4-c5 openings we would not have witnessed this massacre.

I think that It is not fair that openings with a rich historical tradition such as

- Spanish (2)
- Scottish (0)
- Russian (0)
- Italian (0)

have in chess a value equal to about 1/15 of the value attributed by Sadler and Noomen to the Sicilian opening.

There has never been a TCEC so biased in favor of Stockfish. Crowds of Dutch and East Indians we are witnessed, but not even a West Indian that we know is the opening that Alpha Zero and presumibly LC0 plays with white at the best.

Will we see, in the future, in TCEC22, a more balanced choice of 1 e4-e5 versus 1 e4-c5?

[Sopel]

The openings were chosen randomly. It's natural that a tournament appears biased towards the better player.

[kranium]

The openings were chosen randomly. It's natural that a tournament appears biased towards the better player.

I believe the superfinal used just 50 positions (in sequence) for the 100 games.
https://tcec-chess.com/articles/TCEC_Openings_FAQ.html

ECO code distribution
ECO A: 10 lines
ECO B: 16 lines
ECO C: 10 lines
ECO D: 8 lines
ECO E: 6 lines

Move length distribution
3 moves: 5 lines
4 moves: 7 lines
5 moves: 4 lines
6 moves: 12 lines
7 moves: 2 lines
8 moves: 7 lines
9 moves: 5 lines
10 moves: 3 lines
>10 moves: 5 lines
http://blogchess2016.blogspot.com/2021/ ... by-gm.html

Personally, I would like see less human interference...give the engines more say in the opening.
(>10 moves?) that's taking a huge chunk of the game away from the engines...

[CMCanavessi]

The openings were chosen randomly. It's natural that a tournament appears biased towards the better player.

They weren´t random at all.

[CMCanavessi]

The victory of Stockfish 14 over Lc0 69626 is fully deserved.

The concreteness of play through precise processes of calculation of the variants, which the Alpha-Beta algorithm allows, is better for sure than the "fuzzy" and "promising" lines as Lco is able to calculate through PUCT algorithm.

In any case, the final result has determined by openings that has scarce strategic value: too many openings had imbalanced tactics just at the exit of the book lines.

The final result 19 to 7 is too liar as regard the actual value of the two programs, even regardless of the Lco ghastly time management. (Stockfish time management was fantastic, he never played the first move out of the book too quickly)

During the training of AlphaZero, and presumibly Lc0 too, we know from Nature paper that Sicilian is immediately discarded, so Lco has so little experience of autoplay in this opening.

I am confident about one thing. In case of as many Spanish as the Sicilians had been played (how many were played? I counted only 2 Tchigorin against about 30 Sicilians) the final result would be tight.

Or, more trivially, if Sadler and Noomen had selected a number of 1 e4-e5 openings equal to the number of 1 e4-c5 openings we would not have witnessed this massacre.

I think that It is not fair that openings with a rich historical tradition such as

- Spanish (2)
- Scottish (0)
- Russian (0)
- Italian (0)

have in chess a value equal to about 1/15 of the value attributed by Sadler and Noomen to the Sicilian opening.

There has never been a TCEC so biased in favor of Stockfish. Crowds of Dutch and East Indians we are witnessed, but not even a West Indian that we know is the opening that Alpha Zero and presumibly LC0 plays with white at the best.

Will we see, in the future, in TCEC22, a more balanced choice of 1 e4-e5 versus 1 e4-c5?

FRC is the future. No bias, just random.

[Branko Radovanovic]

The openings were chosen randomly. It's natural that a tournament appears biased towards the better player.

They weren´t random at all.

What would you consider "random"?

[CMCanavessi]

The openings were chosen randomly. It's natural that a tournament appears biased towards the better player.

They weren´t random at all.

What would you consider "random"?

Picking from a book?

[amanjpro]

The victory of Stockfish 14 over Lc0 69626 is fully deserved.

The concreteness of play through precise processes of calculation of the variants, which the Alpha-Beta algorithm allows, is better for sure than the "fuzzy" and "promising" lines as Lco is able to calculate through PUCT algorithm.

In any case, the final result has determined by openings that has scarce strategic value: too many openings had imbalanced tactics just at the exit of the book lines.

The final result 19 to 7 is too liar as regard the actual value of the two programs, even regardless of the Lco ghastly time management. (Stockfish time management was fantastic, he never played the first move out of the book too quickly)

During the training of AlphaZero, and presumibly Lc0 too, we know from Nature paper that Sicilian is immediately discarded, so Lco has so little experience of autoplay in this opening.

I am confident about one thing. In case of as many Spanish as the Sicilians had been played (how many were played? I counted only 2 Tchigorin against about 30 Sicilians) the final result would be tight.

Or, more trivially, if Sadler and Noomen had selected a number of 1 e4-e5 openings equal to the number of 1 e4-c5 openings we would not have witnessed this massacre.

I think that It is not fair that openings with a rich historical tradition such as

- Spanish (2)
- Scottish (0)
- Russian (0)
- Italian (0)

have in chess a value equal to about 1/15 of the value attributed by Sadler and Noomen to the Sicilian opening.

There has never been a TCEC so biased in favor of Stockfish. Crowds of Dutch and East Indians we are witnessed, but not even a West Indian that we know is the opening that Alpha Zero and presumibly LC0 plays with white at the best.

Will we see, in the future, in TCEC22, a more balanced choice of 1 e4-e5 versus 1 e4-c5?

FRC is the future. No bias, just random.

I don't think its the variant that matters here. If you use a book, then you have some influence on the result... If we are only interested in finding the strongest engine, then matches should be bookless, if we want to also enjoy the games then it is debatable

[CMCanavessi]

I don't think its the variant that matters here. If you use a book, then you have some influence on the result... If we are only interested in finding the strongest engine, then matches should be bookless, if we want to also enjoy the games then it is debatable

If you play from the start position you get 100 draws. That's how it is.

I do agree, however, that using man-made 14 moves openings are quite stupid. That's like making the engines only play the endgame, and probably lines that the engines themselves would never ever play.

[amanjpro]

I don't think its the variant that matters here. If you use a book, then you have some influence on the result... If we are only interested in finding the strongest engine, then matches should be bookless, if we want to also enjoy the games then it is debatable

If you play from the start position you get 100 draws. That's how it is.

I do agree, however, that using man-made 14 moves openings are quite stupid. That's like making the engines only play the endgame, and probably lines that the engines themselves would never ever play.

Well, put Stockfish against Zahak, both bookless, we will see if we get 100 draws...

Thing is, these two monsters are almost unbeatable without human interference, so yeah I agree, bookless matches are probably going to be a drawfest.

But I enjoy TCEC that way better than a hypothetical bookless version, I don't care who wins, I care about seeing a chess that I might enjoy (well, to be honest I don't think I enjoy their games that much anyways, I'm too weak a player to understand their games)