Komodo Dragon vs. GM Perelshteyn, knight odds match.

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Yes, he has dragon 2.5.1. Gm Wirig only trained with K12, pre-NNUE and much weaker. So this might offset progress from dragon 2 to now. If so, we might lose by 4 to 2, same percentage as Wirig match.

A match against a machine is very different from a match against a human, back in 2002 Kramnik’s strategy was to aim at closed, controlled positions that are difficult to play for a tactical-oriented computer program. Also in the match Kramnik versus Deep Fritz he was given a copy of the Deep Fritz programme three months before the Bahrain match so he had some feel for the computer, no changes to the software was allowed once the games started and Kramnik was allowed to rest every six hours. and the match still ended in a draw. 20 years later if Kramnik accept a challenge against Komodo Dragon xxx.x with two pawns Odds, sponsored by Komodo Dragon Starbuck coffee.

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Yes, he has dragon 2.5.1. Gm Wirig only trained with K12, pre-NNUE and much weaker. So this might offset progress from dragon 2 to now. If so, we might lose by 4 to 2, same percentage as Wirig match.

A match against a machine is very different from a match against a human, back in 2002 Kramnik’s strategy was to aim at closed, controlled positions that are difficult to play for a tactical-oriented computer program. Also in the match Kramnik versus Deep Fritz he was given a copy of the Deep Fritz programme three months before the Bahrain match so he had some feel for the computer, no changes to the software was allowed once the games started and Kramnik was allowed to rest every six hours. and the match still ended in a draw.

Note: These two are too close in strength, but the Stockfish is waiting with piranha teeth https://tcec-chess.com/

[AdminX]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Yes, he has dragon 2.5.1. Gm Wirig only trained with K12, pre-NNUE and much weaker. So this might offset progress from dragon 2 to now. If so, we might lose by 4 to 2, same percentage as Wirig match.

A match against a machine is very different from a match against a human, back in 2002 Kramnik’s strategy was to aim at closed, controlled positions that are difficult to play for a tactical-oriented computer program. Also in the match Kramnik versus Deep Fritz he was given a copy of the Deep Fritz programme three months before the Bahrain match so he had some feel for the computer, no changes to the software was allowed once the games started and Kramnik was allowed to rest every six hours. and the match still ended in a draw. 20 years later if Kramnik accept a challenge against Komodo Dragon xxx.x with two pawns Odds, sponsored by Komodo Dragon Starbuck coffee.

Hahaha .... LMAO Funny!!!

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Yes, he has dragon 2.5.1. Gm Wirig only trained with K12, pre-NNUE and much weaker. So this might offset progress from dragon 2 to now. If so, we might lose by 4 to 2, same percentage as Wirig match.

A match against a machine is very different from a match against a human, back in 2002 Kramnik’s strategy was to aim at closed, controlled positions that are difficult to play for a tactical-oriented computer program. Also in the match Kramnik versus Deep Fritz he was given a copy of the Deep Fritz programme three months before the Bahrain match so he had some feel for the computer, no changes to the software was allowed once the games started and Kramnik was allowed to rest every six hours. and the match still ended in a draw. 20 years later if Kramnik accept a challenge against Komodo Dragon xxx.x with two pawns Odds, sponsored by Komodo Dragon Starbuck coffee.

Hahaha .... LMAO Funny!!!

I always imagine Mr. Kaufman drinking Komodo Dragon coffee from starbuck during his matches between Humans vs Komodo Dragon

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

[lkaufman]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

If we go with 16 threads then indeed I could use my fast 16 core machine instead. But everything is set up on my threadripper now, so there is no advantage to switching, and I might decide to use maybe 24 threads, depending on testing.

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

If we go with 16 threads then indeed I could use my fast 16 core machine instead. But everything is set up on my threadripper now, so there is no advantage to switching, and I might decide to use maybe 24 threads, depending on testing.

By now you probably have done several testing with 16 threads and with 24 threads; which seems to be more effective at Knight Odds against an engine of similar strength Gaviota-win32-0.84 = GM Perelshteyn ?

[lkaufman]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

If we go with 16 threads then indeed I could use my fast 16 core machine instead. But everything is set up on my threadripper now, so there is no advantage to switching, and I might decide to use maybe 24 threads, depending on testing.

By now you probably have done several testing with 16 threads and with 24 threads; which seems to be more effective at Knight Odds against an engine of similar strength Gaviota-win32-0.84 = GM Perelshteyn ?

So far it seems 16 threads is best for this, but there are many ways to limit the search, by time, by depth, by Skill level, or by threads. So it's not a simple question, I'm trying to find the best combination. I'm hoping that we can draw the match, but I'm not predicting that.

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

If we go with 16 threads then indeed I could use my fast 16 core machine instead. But everything is set up on my threadripper now, so there is no advantage to switching, and I might decide to use maybe 24 threads, depending on testing.

By now you probably have done several testing with 16 threads and with 24 threads; which seems to be more effective at Knight Odds against an engine of similar strength Gaviota-win32-0.84 = GM Perelshteyn ?

So far it seems 16 threads is best for this, but there are many ways to limit the search, by time, by depth, by Skill level, or by threads. So it's not a simple question, I'm trying to find the best combination. I'm hoping that we can draw the match, but I'm not predicting that.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1 at 15'+10" , there is a way to get a least a draw, a day before the match offer him to play at 10'+10" instead

[Chessqueen]

Revisiting my thoughts on this match, my opinion has now changed given that the match does not start until Nov 6th and that the GM does have a version of Komodo to practice with, I now think he should have good chances to win the match. I don't believe I gave enough thought to this little detail.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1, he only need ChrisW opening book and Mr. Kaufman 32 core Threadripper, but I strongly recommend Mr. Kaufman to set his Komodo Dragon xxx.x to play at (5'+2") instead of (3' + 2")

I've run enough simulations to say that using more than 16 threads or more than 3' +2" (with 16 threads) is totally useless for knight odds. Imagine if we had a 32 man tablebase (from a million years in the future!). How would that help us in a knight odds match? Sure, if we got down to less than a pawn deficit in a game it might see a weird draw that normal search can't find, but against a knight-odds human opponent there is no point in assuming that he will play perfectly, it's better not to see every little detail in the far future that he will never even think of. If we get within drawing range we will surely not lose even if we play imperfectly, and if we reach a position where a win is possible we will probably win even if we miss the first win. Knight odds chess requires a different mental model than normal chess. Also, the ChrisW opening book is of no use for a human preparing, it is only for getting variety for computer vs computer matches. The positions (mostly) won't actually occur in real knight odds games.

If that is the case how come you will use a 32 core Threadripper instead of a 16 threads >

If we go with 16 threads then indeed I could use my fast 16 core machine instead. But everything is set up on my threadripper now, so there is no advantage to switching, and I might decide to use maybe 24 threads, depending on testing.

By now you probably have done several testing with 16 threads and with 24 threads; which seems to be more effective at Knight Odds against an engine of similar strength Gaviota-win32-0.84 = GM Perelshteyn ?

So far it seems 16 threads is best for this, but there are many ways to limit the search, by time, by depth, by Skill level, or by threads. So it's not a simple question, I'm trying to find the best combination. I'm hoping that we can draw the match, but I'm not predicting that.

Since he is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1 at 15'+10" , there is a way to get a least a draw, a day before the match offer him to play at 10'+10" instead

I was fooling around, but since GM Perelshteyn is practicing with Komodo Dragon 2.5.1 the best that Komodo Dragon xxx.x can do is to get a Draw. But even if Tinsley was allowed to practice against Chinook, a checkers-playing program programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer, he was NOT going to beat Chinnook, the best that he could have done was draw several games

Note: I do NOT believe that Chinook won the match since Chinook became the first computer program in history to win a human world championship by drawing 6 games, but only because his stomach hurt. The pain was keeping him up all night. After six games—all draws—he needed to see a doctor But Schaeffer was crushed. He’d devoted years of his life to creating a program that could beat the best checkers player ever, and just as he was about to realize this dream, Tinsley quit. Seven months later, Tinsley died, never having truly lost a match to Chinook.
https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... rs/534111/