the annihilation of Stockfish with queen sacrifice 2018

[mar]

If SF's "move overhead" were configured reasonably to account for the lag, that wouldn't happen. The default is 30 ms, which is only appropriate for fast GUIs on the same machine.

This and/or simply add an option to never go below say 75% of opponent's remaining time unless resolving a fail low.

[syzygy]

If SF's "move overhead" were configured reasonably to account for the lag, that wouldn't happen. The default is 30 ms, which is only appropriate for fast GUIs on the same machine.

This and/or simply add an option to never go below say 75% of opponent's remaining time unless resolving a fail low.

Interestingly, SF's time management does not take into account the time left on the opponent's clock at all.

But it's not so clear at all that any of this would prevent these time losses. I guess these games were played with zero increment (indeed, 5 min/side) and Pablo was premoving most of the time. Once Pablo has a time advantage, the engine might just be doomed (unless it manages to open up the position).

[JohnW]

So have you ever beat Stockfish by checkmate?

[syzygy]

So have you ever beat Stockfish by checkmate?

Stockfish is one of those annoying opponents that lets time run out before you get to checkmate it

[syzygy]

In many video games it is essentially impossible to beat the toughest bosses at the highest difficulty level if you play naively. You have to figure out a strategy and painstakingly pursue that strategy to beat the game. This is what Pablo has done versus Stockfish.

[Father]

John. To beat a top chess computer on.checkmate, looks not probable for me.
3400 elo at computer inside, and it's hardware and software make engines like tactical monsters, and these items are arguments for do close to impossible take a checkmate playng computers, at least for.me.
Then the way in a.battle in a.man versus machine is putting the engine in.a.route where computers broke its algorithm of starving.
Best regards,
Pablo

[Steve Maughan]

If the post title was simply, "human beats StockFish" I wouldn't blink and eye. Instead it was click-bait claiming an "annihilation" due to a "queen sacrifice". Of course I'd like to see such a game so I played through it. Only to find it was a win on time. Not only that, Pablo wasn't winning at the end of the game, and the "queen sacrifice" was an irrelevance. It's ridiculous to regard such a win as an "annihilation".

I've learnt by lesson - even if Pablo has the most brilliant win against the best of the best, I won't bother with taking any notice.

Click-bait regards,

Steve

[Father]

Steve,
I am confuse with the chess machine plan.after my Queen.sacrifice..Engine could open.the game and.checkmark to.me, but computer was full of nervios
Best,
Pablo

[karger]

Steve , thank you , you are so correct. The only way to deal with people like this is ignore them so their only conversation is with himself. Karger

[George Tsavdaris]

Possibly the most boring game I've ever watched - YMMV. Describing it as an "annihilation" is a stretch at best.

Boring to watch in real time, but it does show nicely how engines can still be outsmarted.

It's a loss on time. Hardly outsmarting the engine.

It certainly is outsmarting the engine. If you lack the computational power of your opponent, you have to be smart and find some other way to win.

Problem is, that the engines don't know about the internet lag that loses time for them in their turn.