SWISSTEST: 1.RobboLito - 2.Rybka - 3.Stockfish
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 338
- Joined: Fri Jun 22, 2007 12:53 am
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
There are different kinds of "lost". If you can prove against a win with analysis spending a lot of time etc. it does make that move equivalent to a mate-in-1.
-
- Posts: 3019
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
For me, choosing the best move is one where this move and no other, achieves a significant or winning advantage. Avoiding a move, in a test suite, is one where the move to avoid leads to an undesired result (a draw or a loss), and other moves achieve a different result.bob wrote:I'm not a fan of these types of positions, as if your program is strong enough, it may well see that everything loses, and then choosing the best move is really irrelevant, if you can "see".
This was the whole point of my satiric position. Who cares if I don't play Kc8, which is mate in one, when the alternative leads to the exact same result? This for me is an exercise in futility. It is no different than complaining the engine found one forced mate, instead of another. A forced mate is a forced mate.
I take issue with those positions because they prove quite literally nothing. All moves lose forcibly, so who cares which losing move the engine chose?
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
-
- Posts: 3019
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: SWISSTEST: Pos. 3
Just because Stockfish is incapable of seeing a win for Black, changes nothing. If I played that position against you, let's say via e-mail or whatnot, I will win 100% of the games even if you play Re4. How is this an improvement over other losing moves?Paloma wrote:Some analysis with Stockfish 1.5.1:
3: SwissTest4_03 - Verteidigung, Aristarch45-TheBaron15, CompGame 2005
r1b2rk1/2p2ppp/p2b4/1p6/6Pq/1BP5/PP1P1PP1/RNBQR1K1 w - - 0 1
The different between 1st and 2nd move is almost 1 pawn, and Re4 is NOT the move to avoided. Is so, the Pos. ist solved.
This is the point that Walter means.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 1:04 pm
- Location: Switzerland
- Full name: Walter Eigenmann
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
Hmm... Albert the great chess teacher...Albert Silver wrote:Actually, I was hoping you'd explain the purpose of testing for moves when all moves have the same end result.
Still, the bishop endgame will make a good class subject. I give a weekly class at my club, usually on tactics and analysis, but this is a good one too, as I'm sure many of the students (the highest rating is only ~1850) will have similar difficulties in evaluating it.
But still you don't get the point - I'll explain again:
You have criticized my little study B vs B (SwissTest No.20)
5k2/5ppp/p7/3p1b2/5P2/5P2/PPBK3P/8 b - - 0 1
After the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only a few moves the pawn endgame is over,
and it's a very easy play for white.
But see the position after Bd7 or Bc8):
- How many moves does it take until the definitive defeat of black? 40? 60? 100?
- And on this long long way, white could make a little mistake...
- BTW: Black has a very difficult position, but is he really lost? When you think so,
then show us a forced win for white after Bd7 or Bc8, please...
- So the only conclusion is: "Don't exchange the bishops!"
As you can see, in reality it's a big difference between the "candidates" and the "avoid-move".
That's chess, my friend, and that's the stuff that you need to teach
your ~1850-kiddys: "Always search for the maximum defense!"
(And engines have to do so too!)
Yeah, you're thinking in black&white - but chess is in color...Albert Silver wrote: Avoiding a move, in a test suite, is one where the move to avoid leads to an undesired result (a draw or a loss), and other moves achieve a different result.
Chess in 'Glarean Magazin' (Ryzen7/16T)
-
- Posts: 198
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:44 am
- Location: Helsinki, Finland
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
You mean few, a few is much more than few. i.eAfter the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only a few moves the pawn endgame is over,
After the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only few moves the pawn endgame is over,
-
- Posts: 262
- Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 1:04 pm
- Location: Switzerland
- Full name: Walter Eigenmann
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
Yes, thanks.jarkkop wrote:You mean few, a few is much more than few. i.eAfter the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only a few moves the pawn endgame is over,
After the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only few moves the pawn endgame is over,
Chess in 'Glarean Magazin' (Ryzen7/16T)
-
- Posts: 6401
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:30 pm
- Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
I do not believe this is that simple. With the bishops the victory is straightforward, with the pawn endgame could be tricky because of the pawn structure in the King side. You still have to choose your moves very carefully or could end up drawing.Glarean wrote:Hmm... Albert the great chess teacher...Albert Silver wrote:Actually, I was hoping you'd explain the purpose of testing for moves when all moves have the same end result.
Still, the bishop endgame will make a good class subject. I give a weekly class at my club, usually on tactics and analysis, but this is a good one too, as I'm sure many of the students (the highest rating is only ~1850) will have similar difficulties in evaluating it.
But still you don't get the point - I'll explain again:
You have criticized my little study B vs B (SwissTest No.20)
5k2/5ppp/p7/3p1b2/5P2/5P2/PPBK3P/8 b - - 0 1
After the "avoid move" Bxc2?, Black is lost immediately; after only a few moves the pawn endgame is over,
and it's a very easy play for white.
But see the position after Bd7 or Bc8):
- How many moves does it take until the definitive defeat of black? 40? 60? 100?
- And on this long long way, white could make a little mistake...
- BTW: Black has a very difficult position, but is he really lost? When you think so,
then show us a forced win for white after Bd7 or Bc8, please...
- So the only conclusion is: "Don't exchange the bishops!"
Miguel
As you can see, in reality it's a big difference between the "candidates" and the "avoid-move".
That's chess, my friend, and that's the stuff that you need to teach
your ~1850-kiddys: "Always search for the maximum defense!"
(And engines have to do so too!)
Yeah, you're thinking in black&white - but chess is in color...Albert Silver wrote: Avoiding a move, in a test suite, is one where the move to avoid leads to an undesired result (a draw or a loss), and other moves achieve a different result.
-
- Posts: 10297
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:37 am
- Location: Tel-Aviv Israel
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
Without discussing about the test suite(did not look at the positions) I think that a move to avoid does not have to be a move that leads to a different result.Albert Silver wrote:For me, choosing the best move is one where this move and no other, achieves a significant or winning advantage. Avoiding a move, in a test suite, is one where the move to avoid leads to an undesired result (a draw or a loss), and other moves achieve a different result.bob wrote:I'm not a fan of these types of positions, as if your program is strong enough, it may well see that everything loses, and then choosing the best move is really irrelevant, if you can "see".
You may consider a move as a mistake even if it does not change the theoretic result of the game.
If my opponent have mate in 50 in KQPKQ endgame and I play a move that allow him to trade queens to a simple KPK winning endgame then I consider my move as a blunder.
The optimal move clearly give me better practical chances.
We did not solve chess but even if 1.e4 a5 does not change the theoretical draw result of the game then I will still consider 1...a5 as a positional mistake.
Uri
-
- Posts: 1167
- Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2008 9:07 pm
- Full name: Herbert L
Re: SWISSTEST: Pos. 3
> Just because Stockfish is incapable of seeing a win for Black
(-1.29): 15.Re4 Qh2+ shows stockfish knows that white stands bad, but losing later as for example Qf3.
From engine view - and we test engines here - Re4 is still to be the best move prevent the lost immediately. Black wins also against Re4 that's no question, but later such as Qf3 or g3.
That's was the engines should be detected.
(-1.29): 15.Re4 Qh2+ shows stockfish knows that white stands bad, but losing later as for example Qf3.
From engine view - and we test engines here - Re4 is still to be the best move prevent the lost immediately. Black wins also against Re4 that's no question, but later such as Qf3 or g3.
That's was the engines should be detected.
-
- Posts: 3019
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:57 pm
- Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Re: SWISSTEST: 1.Rybka- 2.RobboLito- 3.Stockfish
Only if the opponent can make a move that changes the result or evaluation. Let us suppose that chess has been calculated to a draw, and that 1...a5 also leads to the draw. Let us also suppose we are both capable of playing perfect chess. Perfect chess means that we are now reduced to 3 evaluations: white wins, black wins, or a draw.Uri Blass wrote:We did not solve chess but even if 1.e4 a5 does not change the theoretical draw result of the game then I will still consider 1...a5 as a positional mistake.
Uri
If I play 1...a5, and am capable of forcing the draw, and there is no way you will play moves that allow you to lose, then 1...a5 is not a positional mistake.
Albert
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."