20 years of Centaur play, what does the future hold?

[Ozymandias]

Prehistoric Years

It all started back in June 1998, when a new tournament director, took the reins of an event, that had been running for ten years, in León. He wanted something different, and saw fit to achieve that, by materializing Kasparov's idea about Advanced Chess, so he brought him to play against the previous year's winner (Topalov), both of them having access to a 333 MHz Pentium II. It wasn't exactly what we'd consider "Centaur Chess" nowadays (help from a chess DB or an engine, not both), but it was a start. Over the course of five years, other players would add their names to this short-lived experiment: Anand, Karpov, Polgar, Leko, Shirov and Kramnik, who won the last one in 2002.

During this early years, there was a rift between the chess elite and amateurs. While the former had a place in León, the latter had to seek solace in online play. It was the Advanced Chess Organization (CCO), the one responsible to hold the Advanced Chess Tournaments, on the Free Internet Chess Server (FICS). There was a total of fifteen events, with the las one taking place on June 18, 2005. This was a time, when Anand was still considered to be the best player in the field, basically because groups of players were isolated, and there was no money incentive, for amateurs to really show their potential. This was about to change.
----------------------------------------------

The Golden Age

Approximately at the same time, that the CCO stopped its activity, a new entity would enter the scene, to change everything with the PAL/CSS Freestyle Chess Tournaments. With aggregated prize funds, totaling $132,000, distributed between May 28, 2005 and April 27, 2008, eight tournaments would set the stage, for the transition in Centaur Chess, from Advanced to Freestyle Chess. Overnight, not only standalone supercomputers were made obsolete, but the established conception about the supremacy of a GM, with competitive HW, was shattered. Being offered an appropriate reward, the amateur chess player, rose to the challenge.

The change was so sudden, that when the 1st Advanced Chess Tournament (Benidorm, 2007) offered 7.500€ in prizes, they did it without actually realizing they were hosting a Freestyle Chess tournament. Both the name of the event, as well as the rules the arbiters were trying (hopelessly) to enforce, already represented an outdated anomaly.
----------------------------------------------

Latter Days

In the last decade, only three tournaments worth mentioning have been sponsored:

• The 1st International Online Advanced Chess Tournament, by MundialChess (2010), with a total of nearly 48.000€ being offered.

• The InfinityChess Freestyle Battle, early 2014, with a prize fund of $20,000.

• The InfinityChess Ultimate Challenge 2017, with a prize fund of $20,000.

None has been able to recapture the feel of the PAL/CSS times. Not only were they different in nature, but they also lacked continuity. One wasn't really a Freestyle Chess tournament, as the short time control made it impossible, for a team to finish a game. The second one was a League Competition, which span for several months, opposed to the Swiss format of old, which would be over in a couple of weekends. The last one adhered to the Swiss format, but was (again) a very long tour and what's worse, it didn't fulfil the promise made earlier by Ciron (Arno).

With summer almost upon us, everything indicates that 2018 won't see any major tournament added to the list, which begs the question: have we already been witness to the Last Day of Freestyle? Because, even if a new competition were held in the coming years, what are the prospects regarding draw death and the absence of "real wins"?

[Paloma]

Nice Post , Ozymandias

[corres]

There is a kind of "Freestyle Chess" competition nowadays too, namely the correspondence chess.
The main difference between classical Freestyle Chess and correspondence chess is in its time control but technically there is no any essential difference.
The prizes are low if any, but a lot of peoples play correspondence.
From the time of appearance of strong chess programs the correspondents use chess machines (mainly at the 90' years) or chess engines. Without them players have no any chance to get higher ratings. Because of this a lot of strong correspondence players were forced to stop their competition.
In the past only the good "over the table" player had opportunity to turn into strong correspondence players
but now a candidate master may be the world champion with the help of super computers.

[Uri Blass]

There is a kind of "Freestyle Chess" competition nowadays too, namely the correspondence chess.
The main difference between classical Freestyle Chess and correspondence chess is in its time control but technically there is no any essential difference.
The prizes are low if any, but a lot of peoples play correspondence.
From the time of appearance of strong chess programs the correspondents use chess machines (mainly at the 90' years) or chess engines. Without them players have no any chance to get higher ratings. Because of this a lot of strong correspondence players were forced to stop their competition.
In the past only the good "over the table" player had opportunity to turn into strong correspondence players
but now a candidate master may be the world champion with the help of super computers.

I believe that no need to have knowledge about chess to be the world champion in correspondence chess today.

I know that weaker players than candidate master became GM's in correspondence chess 20 years ago.
Today probably a computer with no help with better hardware can become the world champion in correspondence chess.

[corres]

I believe that no need to have knowledge about chess to be the world champion in correspondence chess today.
I know that weaker players than candidate master became GM's in correspondence chess 20 years ago.
Today probably a computer with no help with better hardware can become the world champion in correspondence chess.

20 years ago using of computers gave larger advantage because at that time relative a few players had powerful machine - moreover the help from the higher rated club fellow or chess friends was more effective than nowadays. I also know champion who was the leader of a chess team and he was helped by own team members with higher ratings.
I do not agree with you that it does not need chess knowledge for correspondence chess now.
Nowadays the using of strong engines and computers are so universal that only the difference in analytical skill gives some benefit to gain higher ratings.

[yanquis1972]

i'm not so certain, you may be underestimating what uri means by 'better' hardware. but i may be underestimating the lengths top CC players will go. you can rent out limitless h/w if you have the money.

[Uri Blass]

I believe that no need to have knowledge about chess to be the world champion in correspondence chess today.
I know that weaker players than candidate master became GM's in correspondence chess 20 years ago.
Today probably a computer with no help with better hardware can become the world champion in correspondence chess.

20 years ago using of computers gave larger advantage because at that time relative a few players had powerful machine - moreover the help from the higher rated club fellow or chess friends was more effective than nowadays. I also know champion who was the leader of a chess team and he was helped by own team members with higher ratings.
I do not agree with you that it does not need chess knowledge for correspondence chess now.
Nowadays the using of strong engines and computers are so universal that only the difference in analytical skill gives some benefit to gain higher ratings.

It is always possible to get at least 10:1 hardware advantage relative to most of your opponents today and in the past.

Even if your opponent use one average computer all the time(and I believe most correspondence players do not do it) you can get 10:1 hardware advantage simply by using 10 computers at the same time.

[corres]

It is always possible to get at least 10:1 hardware advantage relative to most of your opponents today and in the past.
Even if your opponent use one average computer all the time(and I believe most correspondence players do not do it) you can get 10:1 hardware advantage simply by using 10 computers at the same time.

It is pity but even the top chess engines running on top hardware make weak moves and positional mistakes.
An experienced CC player know the weak points of engines and he strives after these weakness.
An another area is the opening repertoire and its inaccuracy.
Because there is no large difference in the used hardware (with 1:10 disadvantage nobody can be top CC player!)
between competitors the knowledge of analysis may be the decisive thing.
If one CC player uses an average computer and an another uses 10 average computers they will not play in the same Elo group for a long time...

[Ozymandias]

The main difference between classical Freestyle Chess and correspondence chess is in its time control but technically there is no any essential difference.

At Freestyle time controls, you're limited to just one of three methods of analysis. I'd say that's a big difference, although given how the game should be a draw anyway, I'm remiss to say it's an essential one.

Today probably a computer with no help with better hardware can become the world champion in correspondence chess.

If you need to win a game against the previous champion, you can't, because wins aren't possible at that level anymore.

20 years ago using of computers gave larger advantage because at that time relative a few players had powerful machine - moreover the help from the higher rated club fellow or chess friends was more effective than nowadays.

I don't know if it was more effective, but it was a way to inflate your rating that dates back even more. When I joined the club next to home, more than 20 years ago, one of the worst players there (if not the worst), was a decent correspondence player. His secret? He brought his positions to the club every Friday evening, so that the higher rated players would analyse it for him.

The interesting point about this, is that in no way was this practice forbidden. Whether you had a low or high rating, could just depend on who you knew. When computers started being of use, this became increasingly irrelevant, no longer did acquaintances matter, you could go to the store and buy one. BUT this democratisation of resources was fought tooth and nail, use of computers wasn't automatically allowed, or even as tolerated as the human counterpart help had been.

It is always possible to get at least 10:1 hardware advantage relative to most of your opponents today and in the past.

It is possible, but it's also fruitless. With even a laptop, I could hold the draw against any opponent, with so much time at my disposal.

An another area is the opening repertoire and its inaccuracy.

Only way to make a difference, among players who adequately use a computer.

Nice Post , Ozymandias

Thx.

[corres]

20 years ago using of computers gave larger advantage because at that time relative a few players had powerful machine - moreover the help from the higher rated club fellow or chess friends was more effective than nowadays.

I don't know if it was more effective, but it was a way to inflate your rating that dates back even more. When I joined the club next to home, more than 20 years ago, one of the worst players there (if not the worst), was a decent correspondence player. His secret? He brought his positions to the club every Friday evening, so that the higher rated players would analyse it for him.
The interesting point about this, is that in no way was this practice forbidden. Whether you had a low or high rating, could just depend on who you knew. When computers started being of use, this became increasingly irrelevant, no longer did acquaintances matter, you could go to the store and buy one. BUT this democratisation of resources was fought tooth and nail, use of computers wasn't automatically allowed, or even as tolerated as the human counterpart help had been.

20 years ago friendly help was more effective than now because higher rated OTB players were relative to chess engines more stronger than they are nowadays.
In correspondence chess there are nothing forbidden to get help. But only a few players have the opportunity to get help from his chess friends.