italien opening

[Master Om]

If white does not give chance all black will get is equality, Don;t except White plays like a noob against black. If Ruy Lopez stands out then Italian will so as both have same themes.

It is weird that this comes from you Master Om, because in 2011 you were holding that the Italian was a superior defense for black than the Spanish. Back then I held the Spanish was the best defense, so we started a series of matches where I'd try to beat your Italian and you'd try to beat my Spanish.

The result should be well know by you:

{url=http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=22314]Game 1 1-0[/url] (you beat my Spanish)
{url=http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=23346]Game 2 1-0[/url] (you beat my Spanish)
{url=http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=25302]Game 3 1-0[/url] (I resigned the Spanish)
Game 4 1/2-1/2 (I drew with the Spanish)

It took me four games to be able to find a defense.

Apparently we never played the Italian part of the match but you used to be on the other side of these discussions, where it'd be more likely for white to "give chance" to black in the Italian than in the Spanish, where my best lines could never beat the opponents that I beat with the Italian.

No itsnt weird. I never said Italian or any opening holdable or not as it depends on the choice of openings. All mainlines in chess are equal. In e4 openings it takes time to equalise and that too with proper play. In d4 based openings u can play 2 tempos down even without issues.
U lost the 3 games against me as u blundered. Last one u didn't blunder hence match was drawn. U can loose in any opening if u blunder.

[Uri Blass]

I think that even in the last case they can generalize from their experience against engines and play correctly moves that they know to be good in similiar situations.

Engines and humans play so completely different chess that even if you get a variation where you perform relatively well against engines they might be useless against humans.

I tried this back in Rebel Decade times, because I could beat the engine at Depth 6. So what I did was using the same openings and moves I was using to defeat Rebel Depth 6 against humans. The result was that I performed worse against humans than with my usual repertoire, because humans played nothing like Rebel, and they wouldn't play the blunders that were allowing me to beat Rebel, so it was useless.

My idea is to not to repeat lines that you win but to repeat lines that the engine beat you.

If stockfish with black with some opening book and the italien defence beat you then memorize stockfish's games against you and play the same moves that stockfish use to beat you.

Of course it is possible that the human opponent play not the same moves as you but in this case the difference is between different humans and not between human and engine.

[jp]

I think that even in the last case they can generalize from their experience against engines and play correctly moves that they know to be good in similiar situations.

Engines and humans play so completely different chess that even if you get a variation where you perform relatively well against engines they might be useless against humans.

I tried this back in Rebel Decade times, because I could beat the engine at Depth 6. So what I did was using the same openings and moves I was using to defeat Rebel Depth 6 against humans. The result was that I performed worse against humans than with my usual repertoire, because humans played nothing like Rebel, and they wouldn't play the blunders that were allowing me to beat Rebel, so it was useless.

That's not a good example, because it's about handicap levels. Programmers don't know how to make engine handicap levels natural.

[Ovyron]

My idea is to not to repeat lines that you win but to repeat lines that the engine beat you.

If stockfish with black with some opening book and the italien defence beat you then memorize stockfish's games against you and play the same moves that stockfish use to beat you.

But this idea isn't specific about the Italian. Stockfish from any opening from black would play moves that would beat every human of the world, so you can memorize what it'd do in the Spanish or in the Sicilian, or whatever.

The humans will not play what engines play as white, so what engines play as white has no relevance.

Actually, if you're going to memorize an opening book, you must focus on the variations that allow you to win your games while minimizing what you have to memorize. The sharpest variations where opponents have little choice about what to do. The Italian isn't such a case.

That's not a good example, because it's about handicap levels. Programmers don't know how to make engine handicap levels natural.

It wasn't a handicap level. I was the strongest Rebel, except it was limited to only being able to see 3 moves ahead (and I could never beat it in the "3 moves and a halfmove ahead" level.)

I honestly don't get why programmers are so focused on handicap levels for engines that feel "natural", Rebel played very natural chess at all levels, so you just needed to adjust its depth. It even came with weakened personalities but they weren't necessary. They're trying to solve a problem that Ed Schröder solved decades ago. Mainly, the "Anti-GM" setting would fool you into thinking you're playing a human (even though it wasn't its purpose.)

[Ovyron]

The busted Italian lines were put to the test in correspondence time controls. Things that became apparent:

a) Black can safely play those moves instantly without needing further consideration and come up in a playable position (27 moves came directly from book without engine analysis.)

b) Because of a), against unprepared opponents on blitz games (or 12+2) black can start thinking with a significant advantage on the clock (white is out of book some 10 moves earlier while black keeps playing instantly)

c) After leaving book the bust needs white to play for a win.

d) If white plays for a draw there's nothing black can do (i.e. if there's positions with evals that favor white but are more dangerous, white can ignore them and aim for a 0.00)

e) White can force a draw at will (to avoid them black would need to give white an advantage bigger than in normal openings)

The revised eval of the Italian is 0.00, but it's clear on faster time control games you'd rather play the black side if you have a book that will outbook your opponent like this.

[corres]

Ovyron claimed that the italien opening is good for black.

GM larry kaufman claims that it is good for white

his sample pages about his new repertoire has the following information:

"So how much of an edge can you get as White with my repertoire? Here
are the Elo advantages for White after my preferred response to the main
lines (per Hiarcs db):
- Caro-Kann Two Knights +40;
- French Tarrasch +45;
- Sicilian 2...♘c6 3.♗b5 +37;
- Sicilian 2...d6 3.♗b5+ +40;
- Petroff main line +37;
- Italian +30;
- Spanish Berlin 5.♖e1 with ♗f1 +42;
- Spanish 6.d3 +26"

What is your opinion?

In correspondence chess it is a slow but true draw for black.
On the table it is good for that player who plays better.

[jdart]

Is it really meaningful to have this discussion about an opening that a zillion sublines? If you want to talk about a specific line, that is another thing.

[Master Om]

The busted Italian lines were put to the test in correspondence time controls. Things that became apparent:

a) Black can safely play those moves instantly without needing further consideration and come up in a playable position (27 moves came directly from book without engine analysis.)

b) Because of a), against unprepared opponents on blitz games (or 12+2) black can start thinking with a significant advantage on the clock (white is out of book some 10 moves earlier while black keeps playing instantly)

c) After leaving book the bust needs white to play for a win.

d) If white plays for a draw there's nothing black can do (i.e. if there's positions with evals that favor white but are more dangerous, white can ignore them and aim for a 0.00)

e) White can force a draw at will (to avoid them black would need to give white an advantage bigger than in normal openings)

The revised eval of the Italian is 0.00, but it's clear on faster time control games you'd rather play the black side if you have a book that will outbook your opponent like this.

lets Play again. Am not satisfied with my play.

[Ovyron]

lets Play again. Am not satisfied with my play.

Alright, here's the new game. I'll be taking another route (in case you think Ng5 is better) and will play a different 6th move if we transpose back to first game.

This is more of an experiment as I'd really like to see a hole in these lines (since I couldn't find it myself, that'd be really instructive.)

[Uri Blass]

lets Play again. Am not satisfied with my play.

Alright, here's the new game. I'll be taking another route (in case you think Ng5 is better) and will play a different 6th move if we transpose back to first game.

This is more of an experiment as I'd really like to see a hole in these lines (since I couldn't find it myself, that'd be really instructive.)

I remember that you claimed that black has bigger advantage in the italien opening relative to the advantage white has in the opening position.

It seems that this claim was with no basis.

A basis means a tree that cover all white's replies and show that in every leaf of it the score by stockfish is at least bigger than the score stockfish gives to white in the opening position.