We could save a lot of time by never playing any moves in any chess game at all, because objectively all games start in a draw position.
Unfortunately (for you), the result of a game is determined at the end, not at the start or in the middle. It is a remarkable fact that only losers feel the need to point out they had a won position somewhere halfway the game. Like bungling a won position would somehow give them some credit.
Cursed win at TCEC
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 27808
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
-
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:28 am
Re: fortress_draw_rule
"FIDE rule 4.1
Each move must be made with one hand only."
Happy coding...
Each move must be made with one hand only."
Happy coding...
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
But then you get the problem that 50-move rule draws that happen with 6 pieces still on the board are thought by the engine to be a win. But these 6-piece positions are not TB-adjudicated by TCEC, so they have to be won over the board and that will not work (even with the 50-move rule disabled the losing engine will make sure to keep the draw).MikeB wrote:Actually Stockfish has that knowledge, all its need is that little check box to be unchecked to false. If the operator knew the 50 move rule was not going to follow FIDE 50 move rule, the setting should, have been false. So either way , it is operator error.
So what TCEC would need are 5-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule, and custom-built 6-piece tables that do take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 5-piece position. This is not a very satisfactory situation.
The same applies to ICCF but with 5 replaced by 6: they need 6-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule and custom-built 7-piece tables that take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 6-piece position.
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: fortress_draw_rule
I am afraid you have far too little knowledge of the engines and how they deal with tablebases.Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:no one knows how the game would have ended, as top engine analysis is imperfect, even in relatively simple positions.
It is 100% certain that the game would have ended in a draw. Thanks to its tablebases, H5 knew how to keep the mate beyond the 50-move horizon.
Try it out for yourself:
https://syzygy-tables.info/?fen=K5Q1/8/ ... _b_-_-_0_1
You are white and may play whatever moves you like. Black always plays the move shown at the top.
You won't get DTZ down by more than 1 ply on each move and black won't let DTZ go down by more than 1 ply on each move. Since you start at DTZ=124, you need more than 60 moves to get to a capture or mate. The 50-move rule kicks in after 50 moves. QED.
Now that you have learned something new, you might want to reconsider your earlier statements in this thread.
-
- Posts: 4889
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:34 am
- Location: Pen Argyl, Pennsylvania
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
Good point , it does sound a whole lot simpler just to follow the FIDE rules that govern the way most people play chess...why start start adjudicating draws (what people would consider to be a draw) as wins in the first place?syzygy wrote:But then you get the problem that 50-move rule draws that happen with 6 pieces still on the board are thought by the engine to be a win. But these 6-piece positions are not TB-adjudicated by TCEC, so they have to be won over the board and that will not work (even with the 50-move rule disabled the losing engine will make sure to keep the draw).MikeB wrote:Actually Stockfish has that knowledge, all its need is that little check box to be unchecked to false. If the operator knew the 50 move rule was not going to follow FIDE 50 move rule, the setting should, have been false. So either way , it is operator error.
So what TCEC would need are 5-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule, and custom-built 6-piece tables that do take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 5-piece position. This is not a very satisfactory situation.
The same applies to ICCF but with 5 replaced by 6: they need 6-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule and custom-built 7-piece tables that take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 6-piece position.
Using a faulty automated adjudicator is a little absurd in the first place.
-
- Posts: 565
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 12:03 pm
Re: fortress_draw_rule
Well, this particular dragon yugo attack line is know to be better for white. The lines with black replying h5 to h4 are more balanced.Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:guess the starting position is simply won for white, so the Dragon system might be altogether a bust, unlike other kingside fianchettoe lines
-
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:28 am
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
Just wait a little until cutechess can handle 6 piece tb adjucation and that problem will disappear. There is already a pull request under review.MikeB wrote:Good point , it does sound a whole lot simpler just to follow the FIDE rules that govern the way most people play chess...why start start adjudicating draws (what people would consider to be a draw) as wins in the first place?syzygy wrote:But then you get the problem that 50-move rule draws that happen with 6 pieces still on the board are thought by the engine to be a win. But these 6-piece positions are not TB-adjudicated by TCEC, so they have to be won over the board and that will not work (even with the 50-move rule disabled the losing engine will make sure to keep the draw).MikeB wrote:Actually Stockfish has that knowledge, all its need is that little check box to be unchecked to false. If the operator knew the 50 move rule was not going to follow FIDE 50 move rule, the setting should, have been false. So either way , it is operator error.
So what TCEC would need are 5-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule, and custom-built 6-piece tables that do take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 5-piece position. This is not a very satisfactory situation.
The same applies to ICCF but with 5 replaced by 6: they need 6-piece tables that ignore the 50-move rule and custom-built 7-piece tables that take into account the 50-move rule as long as the 50 moves happen before a conversion to a 6-piece position.
Using a faulty automated adjudicator is a little absurd in the first place.
It may be technically easier to follow the 50 move draw rule in all cases, but many people feel that would be against the main objectives of the game of chess (See article 1.1 - 1.3 FIDE rules for reference). If one side can prove to have an unavoidable checkmate, the game should not end with a draw. It simply feels wrong. Checkmates should take precedence.
-
- Posts: 5566
- Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
But you seem to be alone in this: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62175Ralph Stoesser wrote:If one side can prove to have an unavoidable checkmate, the game should not end with a draw. It simply feels wrong. Checkmates should take precedence.
-
- Posts: 10948
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
- Full name: Kai Laskos
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
Some people commenting in this thread must apply for jobs as lawyers or jurors in some countryside court. This passion for details of legalistic matters and the deepness of these details make me nostalgic of Rybka/Vasik threads.
-
- Posts: 408
- Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2010 9:28 am
Re: Cursed win at TCEC
That one is about the clock, right? No flag fell issues in what we talk about here, so no need to mention that the clock should take priority in such a case. That of course feels absolutely right for most people, because we all know that our time on earth is limited. When our time is over we are not able to complete tasks in the future. That's somehow logical....syzygy wrote:But you seem to be alone in this: http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=62175Ralph Stoesser wrote:If one side can prove to have an unavoidable checkmate, the game should not end with a draw. It simply feels wrong. Checkmates should take precedence.
FIDE is not the ruler for engine competitions. FIDE rules are made for humans exclusively. No piece of software will ever be able to follow article 4.1, because software neither have two hands nor one. So we are somewhat free to do what we want with the FIDE rule set. That seems to be a new message for some people, and for sure it is a good message, so I think it's worth to mention it again here.