Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Discussion of computer chess matches and engine tournaments.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
zullil
Posts: 5670
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by zullil » Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:47 am

Zenmastur wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:31 am
Ovyron wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:00 am
I'll let my moves speak for myself, then.
Sounds like a plan...


Stockfish-dev has -1.31 at depth 62. A draw seems possible still, assuming White simply continues to follow the line Stockfish has been showing for much of the game.

Zenmastur
Posts: 488
Joined: Sat May 31, 2014 6:28 am

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Zenmastur » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:30 am

zullil wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:47 am
Zenmastur wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:31 am
Ovyron wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:00 am
I'll let my moves speak for myself, then.
Sounds like a plan...


Stockfish-dev has -1.31 at depth 62. A draw seems possible still, assuming White simply continues to follow the line Stockfish has been showing for much of the game.
Well, I'm using compound searches to much greater depth than 62 plies (more than double in some cases). While I can't guarantee a forced win from this point, the analysis isn't complete yet, the deeper I search the worse the scores are getting. I've seen score of less than -2.xx in many lines with most between -1.6 and -1.8. the deeper lines tend to have lower score. The scores aren't decreasing rapidly, so he hasn't fallen off a cliff yet, but they are decreasing. This is NOT a good sign.

Regards,

Zenmastur
Only 2 defining forces have ever offered to die for you.....Jesus Christ and the American Soldier. One died for your soul, the other for your freedom.

zullil
Posts: 5670
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by zullil » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:36 am

Zenmastur wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:30 am
zullil wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 9:47 am
Zenmastur wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:31 am
Ovyron wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:00 am
I'll let my moves speak for myself, then.
Sounds like a plan...


Stockfish-dev has -1.31 at depth 62. A draw seems possible still, assuming White simply continues to follow the line Stockfish has been showing for much of the game.
Well, I'm using compound searches to much greater depth than 62 plies (more than double in some cases). While I can't guarantee a forced win from this point, the analysis isn't complete yet, the deeper I search the worse the scores are getting. I've seen score of less than -2.xx in many lines with most between -1.6 and -1.8. the deeper lines tend to have lower score. The scores aren't decreasing rapidly, so he hasn't fallen off a cliff yet, but they are decreasing. This is NOT a good sign.

Regards,

Zenmastur
OK, I only have time for unsupervised searching. I just let Stockfish-dev search with 20 threads, a 64 GB hash table, and 6-man Syzygy tables.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 2754
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Ovyron » Tue Oct 22, 2019 12:37 pm

For people curious about why I'm Dylan Sharp in this game, it comes from here. In that one Harvey beat me without any trouble, and since then I've been playing correspondence chess and analyzing positions pretty much daily, so hopefully I'm not the same scrub I was 11 years ago.

One thing worth noting is that when I'm in a game against Harvey and he's totally winning, I'm the first to notice :wink:

1. g4 d5 2. g5 e5 3. d4 exd4 4. Nf3 c5 5. Bg2

Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds.

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:33 pm


Ras
Posts: 1161
Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2016 6:19 pm
Contact:

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Ras » Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:36 pm

What are the conditions of this game? Is there any time control? Do the players use computer analysis?
Rasmus Althoff
https://www.ct800.net

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:41 pm

Ras wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:36 pm
What are the conditions of this game? Is there any time control? Do the players use computer analysis?
Players are free to use computers/databases/opening books. There is no formal time control.

zullil
Posts: 5670
Joined: Mon Jan 08, 2007 11:31 pm
Location: PA USA
Full name: Louis Zulli

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by zullil » Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:34 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:33 pm
Still following Stockfish-dev's main line, with a current evaluation of -1.38 (though only at depth 50). Still waiting for something other than a Stockfish move!

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 1801
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 9:12 pm
Location: Media City, UK
Contact:

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Harvey Williamson » Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:31 pm

zullil wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:34 pm
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:33 pm
Still following Stockfish-dev's main line, with a current evaluation of -1.38 (though only at depth 50). Still waiting for something other than a Stockfish move!
I think most engines would pick this line.

Dann Corbit
Posts: 10130
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: Dylan Sharp Vs. Harvey Williamson (G4)

Post by Dann Corbit » Tue Oct 22, 2019 10:28 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 7:31 pm
zullil wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 6:34 pm
Harvey Williamson wrote:
Tue Oct 22, 2019 2:33 pm
Still following Stockfish-dev's main line, with a current evaluation of -1.38 (though only at depth 50). Still waiting for something other than a Stockfish move!
I think most engines would pick this line.
It seems very likely that the whole line is nearly forced up to this point.
I only have very shallow analysis and yet all the moves agree except for one (unless we include the root position).

Code: Select all

rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/8/2pp2P1/3p4/5N2/PPP1PPBP/RNBQK2R b KQkq - acd 40; acs 1136; bm Nc6; c3 "Ne7"; ce 134; pm Nc6; pv Nc6 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Be6 Bf4 d4 Ne4 Bd5 Ne5 Nge7 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 Nc6 Bf4 Bxe4 Bxe4 Bd6 Qc2 Bxf4 Bxc6+ Kf8 Bxb7 Qxg5+ Bg2 Rd8 Rad1 Bd6 e3 g6 exd4 cxd4 Qe4 Kg7 Rxd4 Rhe8 Qh4 Qxh4 Rxh4 Re2 Ra4 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Bf3 Red2 Kg2 Re8 b5 Re5 h4 Rxb5; 
rnbqkbnr/pp3ppp/8/2pp2P1/3p4/5N2/PPP1PP1P/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - acd 40; acs 615; bm Bg2; c3 "Bg2"; ce -127; pm Bg2; pv Bg2 Be6 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 d4 Ne4 Nc6 Bf4 Bd5 Ne5 Nge7 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 Nc6 Bf4 Bxe4 Bxe4 Bd6 e3 O-O Qf3 Re8 Rfd1 Bxf4 Qxf4 Qb6 b3 Re7 Rac1 dxe3 fxe3 Rae8 Rf1 Qc7 Qxc7 Rxc7 Bxc6 Rxc6 Rcd1 Rc7 Rf5 b6 Kf2 g6 Rf3 Rce7 h3 Kg7 Ke2 h6 h4 hxg5; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3p2P1/3p4/5N2/PPP1PP1P/RNBQKB1R b KQkq - acd 38; acs 132; bm c5; c3 "c5"; ce 117; pm c5; pv c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 d4 Ne4 Nc6 Bg2 Be6 b4 Nxb4 Ne5 Bd5 Qa4+ Nc6 Rb1 Qa5+ Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O f5 gxf6 gxf6 Nd3 b6 Nf4 Bxe4 Bxe4 Rd8 e3 Ne7 Rd1 Rg8+ Kf1 Bh6 Nh5 Kf7 exd4 Bxc1 Rbxc1 Rg4 f3 Rh4 Ng3 c4 d5 f5 Nxf5 Nxf5 Bxf5 Rxh2 d6 Kf6 Be4 Ke6 Bd5+ Ke5 f4+ Kxf4; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3p2P1/3p4/8/PPP1PP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 595; bm Nf3; c3 "Nf3"; ce -110; pm Qxd4 {12}; pv Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 b4 cxb4 axb4 Bxb4 exd4 a5 Be3 Nce7 Qg4 Nd5 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nxe3 fxe3 Rxe5 Rxf7 Qxg5 Qxg5 Rxg5 Rxb7 Rf8 Kh1 Re5 Rf1 Bc5 Rd7 Be7 Rdd1 Rxf1+ Rxf1 Rxe3 Bd5+ Kh8 Rf7; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3pp1P1/3P4/8/PPP1PP1P/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 38; acs 505; bm exd4; c3 "exd4"; ce 120; pm exd4 {12}; pv exd4 Bg2 c5 c3 Nc6 cxd4 cxd4 Nf3 Bc5 Nbd2 Nge7 Nb3 Bb6 Nbxd4 O-O Be3 Re8 O-O Bg4 Qa4 Bd7 Qc2 Ng6 Rad1 Nxd4 Nxd4 Nh4 Qb3 Nxg2 Kxg2 Bg4 Nf3 Qe7 Bxb6 axb6 Rfe1 Bf5 Qxb6 Be4 Kf1 Qd7 Qb3 Qh3+ Kg1 Qg4+ Kf1; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3pp1P1/8/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 226; bm d4; c3 "d4"; ce -116; pm Bg2 {19} d4 {12} d3 {3} h4 {2} Nc3 {1} c4 {1}; pv d4 exd4 Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 Bd2 Nge5 h4 Nxf3+ Bxf3 Qc7 Rae1 g6 Qh3 Ne5 exd4 Nxf3+ Qxf3 cxd4 Re4 Rxe4 Qxe4 Qd7 Qf3 Re8 Re1 Rxe1+ Bxe1 Bf8 Kg2; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p2P1/8/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 38; acs 178; bm e5; c3 "e5"; ce 121; pm e5 {37} Bf5 {1}; pv e5 d4 exd4 Nf3 c5 Bg2 Nc6 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 d4 Ne4 Be6 b4 Nxb4 Ne5 Bd5 Qa4+ Nc6 Rb1 Qa5+ Qxa5 Nxa5 O-O f5 gxf6 gxf6 Nd3 b6 Nf4 Bxe4 Bxe4 Rd8 e3 Ne7 Rd1 Rg8+ Kf1 Nac6 Bb2 Bh6 Ne2 f5 Bxc6+ Nxc6 exd4 Kf7 dxc5 bxc5 Rxd8 Rxd8; 
rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/6P1/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 560; bm g5; c3 "g5"; ce -102; pm h3 {678} Bg2 {431} g5 {38} e3 {13} b3 {5} f4 {5} e4 {3} Bh3 {2} f3 {1}; pv g5 e5 d4 exd4 Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 b4 cxb4 axb4 Bxb4 Rd1 Qb6 exd4 Nge7 Qd3 Nd5 Kh1 Nc3 Rg1 a5 Qc4 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Be3; 
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/6P1/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - acd 44; acs 74127; bm d5; c3 "d5"; ce 59; pm d5 {1176} c5 {482} e5 {263} d6 {161} Nc6 {135} e6 {116} c6 {18} h6 {16} h5 {15} g5 {13} g6 {10} Nf6 {8} a5 {8} f6 {7} a6 {5} b5 {5} f5 {5} Nh6 {4} b6 {2} Na6 {1}; pv d5 c4 dxc4 Qa4+ c6 Qxc4 e5 Nf3 Bd6; 
rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 70; acs 1589745; bm c4; c1 "01a"; c2 "perft 1 20 perft 2 400 perft 3 8902 perft 4 197281 perft 5 4865609 perft 6 119060324"; c3 "g4"; c4 "e4"; c5 "e4"; c6 "Arves.17811"; ce 8; pm e4 {2379495} d4 {1725526} Nf3 {483679} c4 {479713} g3 {39820} f4 {35589} b3 {27764} Nc3 {13010} e3 {2686} b4 {2458} g4 {2450} c3 {1654} d3 {1649} a3 {1150} h3 {717} a4 {552} h4 {425} f3 {363} Nh3 {82} Na3 {28}; pv c4 c5 Nf3 Nf6 g3 d5 d4 dxc4 Qa4 Nc6 dxc5 e6 Bg2 Bxc5 Nc3 Qa5 Qxc4 O-O O-O Bd7 Ne4 Be7 Bd2 Qf5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bc3 e5 Nd2 Rac8 Qb3 Rc7 Bd5 b5 a3 a6 Rac1 Be7 e3 Rfc8 f4 Be6 Bxe6 Qxe6 Qxe6 fxe6 Ne4 a5 Bxe5 Nxe5 Rxc7 Rxc7 fxe5 Rc4 Rf4 Bc5 Nxc5 Rxc5 Kf1 Rc1 Kg2 Rc5 b4 axb4 axb4 Rc2 Rf2 Rc3 Kf3 Rc4 Rd2 Rxb4 Rd7 g5 g4 Rb2 Rb7 Rxh2 Rxb5; 
I have the latest position also, but it has not had a response yet, so I won't post the analysis.

The only actual disagreement is this position, which is only analyzed to 40 plies in my case. The move played in this thread is Ne7, but I have Nc6 in my database.
acd 40; acs 1136; bm Nc6; c3 "Ne7"; ce 134; pm Nc6; pv Nc6 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Be6 Bf4 d4 Ne4 Bd5 Ne5 Nge7 O-O Nxe5 Bxe5 Nc6 Bf4 Bxe4 Bxe4 Bd6 Qc2 Bxf4 Bxc6+ Kf8 Bxb7 Qxg5+ Bg2 Rd8 Rad1 Bd6 e3 g6 exd4 cxd4 Qe4 Kg7 Rxd4 Rhe8 Qh4 Qxh4 Rxh4 Re2 Ra4 Bc5 b4 Bb6 Bf3 Red2 Kg2 Re8 b5 Re5 h4 Rxb5;

This other disagreement does not count, because it is the necessary start of the game.
acd 70; acs 1589745; bm c4; c1 "01a"; c2 "perft 1 20 perft 2 400 perft 3 8902 perft 4 197281 perft 5 4865609 perft 6 119060324"; c3 "g4"; c4 "e4"; c5 "e4"; c6 "Arves.17811"; ce 8; pm e4 {2379495} d4 {1725526} Nf3 {483679} c4 {479713} g3 {39820} f4 {35589} b3 {27764} Nc3 {13010} e3 {2686} b4 {2458} g4 {2450} c3 {1654} d3 {1649} a3 {1150} h3 {717} a4 {552} h4 {425} f3 {363} Nh3 {82} Na3 {28}; pv c4 c5 Nf3 Nf6 g3 d5 d4 dxc4 Qa4 Nc6 dxc5 e6 Bg2 Bxc5 Nc3 Qa5 Qxc4 O-O O-O Bd7 Ne4 Be7 Bd2 Qf5 Nxf6 Bxf6 Bc3 e5 Nd2 Rac8 Qb3 Rc7 Bd5 b5 a3 a6 Rac1 Be7 e3 Rfc8 f4 Be6 Bxe6 Qxe6 Qxe6 fxe6 Ne4 a5 Bxe5 Nxe5 Rxc7 Rxc7 fxe5 Rc4 Rf4 Bc5 Nxc5 Rxc5 Kf1 Rc1 Kg2 Rc5 b4 axb4 axb4 Rc2 Rf2 Rc3 Kf3 Rc4 Rd2 Rxb4 Rd7 g5 g4 Rb2 Rb7 Rxh2 Rxb5;

These positions are probably the most interesting, because the move chosen by the programs and in my database is not the most commonly played move:

100% Qxd4 in the database, but Nf3 is better:

Code: Select all

rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3p2P1/3p4/8/PPP1PP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 595; bm Nf3; c3 "Nf3"; ce -110; pm Qxd4 {12}; pv Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 b4 cxb4 axb4 Bxb4 exd4 a5 Be3 Nce7 Qg4 Nd5 Ne5 Nxe5 dxe5 Nxe3 fxe3 Rxe5 Rxf7 Qxg5 Qxg5 Rxg5 Rxb7 Rf8 Kh1 Re5 Rf1 Bc5 Rd7 Be7 Rdd1 Rxf1+ Rxf1 Rxe3 Bd5+ Kh8 Rf7; 
Bg2 is more popular, but the second most popular was played in this thread and found in my database:

Code: Select all

rnbqkbnr/ppp2ppp/8/3pp1P1/8/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 226; bm d4; c3 "d4"; ce -116; pm Bg2 {19} d4 {12} d3 {3} h4 {2} Nc3 {1} c4 {1}; pv d4 exd4 Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 Bd2 Nge5 h4 Nxf3+ Bxf3 Qc7 Rae1 g6 Qh3 Ne5 exd4 Nxf3+ Qxf3 cxd4 Re4 Rxe4 Qxe4 Qd7 Qf3 Re8 Re1 Rxe1+ Bxe1 Bf8 Kg2; 
This is the most interesting of all, because the move that appears best (g5) is rarely played because h3 and Bg2 are much more popular, and this position occurs a lot in Grob games:

Code: Select all

rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/3p4/6P1/8/PPPPPP1P/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - acd 38; acs 560; bm g5; c3 "g5"; ce -102; pm h3 {678} Bg2 {431} g5 {38} e3 {13} b3 {5} f4 {5} e4 {3} Bh3 {2} f3 {1}; pv g5 e5 d4 exd4 Nf3 c5 c3 dxc3 Nxc3 Ne7 Bg2 Nbc6 O-O d4 Ne4 Ng6 a3 Bg4 Qc2 Bf5 Nd6+ Bxd6 Qxf5 O-O e3 Re8 b4 cxb4 axb4 Bxb4 Rd1 Qb6 exd4 Nge7 Qd3 Nd5 Kh1 Nc3 Rg1 a5 Qc4 Qb5 Qxb5 Nxb5 Be3; 
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.

Post Reply