Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Discussion of computer chess matches and engine tournaments.

Moderators: hgm, Dann Corbit, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Guenther
Posts: 3807
Joined: Wed Oct 01, 2008 4:33 am
Location: Regensburg, Germany
Full name: Guenther Simon
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by Guenther » Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:54 pm

jefk wrote:
Mon Feb 22, 2021 6:49 pm
MC

ok, since you don't accept my draw (yet), let's continue
strange reading of his post:
Draw provisionally accepted.

Having said that, I will reveal I am not using tablebases, so if you want to continue to see if that can be exploited at this long TC, I'm up for it.
https://rwbc-chess.de
HGM@'chessqueen' 2018-present, aka: 'George' 2013-2016, 'pichy' 2006-2013, 'Jorge Pichard' 2000-2006 (old forum) wrote: http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 79#p789713

jefk
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by jefk » Mon Feb 22, 2021 8:08 pm

well Guenther, MC's message was clear,
but i rephrased the meaning a little, that's all.
Obviously MC did not completely accept my draw offer,
but in the chess rules, it's either accept it or don't.

So formally speaking, he didn't accept it; as for the 'provisional',
because this still is a rather informal game anyway, yes
(also to MC) i now like to continue, at least a few more moves,
also because it's interesting to see differences between the fishes
(often almost like 0.01 score in such positions) and Kom-Dragon
(which as i wrote earlier, seems to differentiate a bit better
between the various moves (it's not simply a matter of scaling);
as some others also say sometimes SF seems to be pruning too
much. But still in the endgame(strategy) with still quite
some pieces even an engine can't foresee all the plans which
strong GM's (or possibly an Idea system with different engines)
can conceive, like king's moving up the board etc. But if you
(or SF) see it too late, you can be busted (not that i claim i
can bust SF in the coming endgame, but anyway still
like to see how it goes, that's all...
jefk

MonteCarlo
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 3:59 pm

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by MonteCarlo » Mon Feb 22, 2021 9:35 pm

16...Rb8



jefk
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by jefk » Tue Feb 23, 2021 11:13 am

17.Rxc6
jefk

MonteCarlo
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 3:59 pm

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by MonteCarlo » Tue Feb 23, 2021 5:12 pm

17...Rxb2


jefk
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by jefk » Tue Feb 23, 2021 7:10 pm

18.Nc3
jefk

MonteCarlo
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 3:59 pm

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by MonteCarlo » Tue Feb 23, 2021 9:03 pm

18...Rc2


jefk
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by jefk » Wed Feb 24, 2021 12:17 am

19.Rb1
jefk

MonteCarlo
Posts: 146
Joined: Sun Dec 25, 2016 3:59 pm

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by MonteCarlo » Wed Feb 24, 2021 2:40 am

19...a5


jefk
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 8:07 pm
Location: the Netherlands
Contact:

Re: Centaur vs Unassisted Engine

Post by jefk » Wed Feb 24, 2021 7:39 pm

ok, 20.Rc5 and then we probably would get a draw
by repetition (*). It anyway now looks drawish indeed,
so i'll offer a draw again.

(*) if i would have to avoid move-repetition as White, (eg. under
possible new correspondence rules), i could do that with 25.Rb5,
then after 24...Nd5 we would get some tactics, but in
the end also equalize.
Presuming this time you accept my draw offer, congrats. :)
It appears that in very long time controls an opening book
-surprisingly- indeed (hardly) isn't needed anymore...
Your setup played strong enough, also in the endgame. In the
past some were suggesting that search-depth is more important
than accurate eval, but now with the better Nnue evals,
an Aquarium/'Idea' setup with different engines for me is just
cumbersome because it's losing the alfa/beta efficiency (**)

Still -for me at least- it was interesting till the end, i had expected
19...Re8, and then first thought White could make chances with
grabbing the Black a pawn, but later it equalized again.
After your latest move 19...a5!, and some extra analysis, i didn't
see any way to proceed to an endgame with e.g one pawn more.
(then i should have played 19.Rd1 instead of 19.Rb1...
In retrospect, 12.Nc3 may have been slightly better (+0.16)
than 12.Re1 (the Ding Liren move against Aronian 2020);
also according to the engines (at least at my shallow depths)
10.Bg5 may have been better (+0.21), but i have my doubts
because Black then gets the bishop pair. Overall, maybe i should
have started with 1.e4, but your engine probably would have gone
for the Berlin defense, against which i also get +0.21 after
5.Re1 (instead of 5.d4) but i doubt i would be able to increase
such an advantage.

For high level human chess i suspect that opening theory will take
some rather big steps forward again, as result of the Lco/SFNnue
revolution(s); minor changes maybe for a beginner's eye, but
certainly many new attacking schemes at the end of the
known opening lines (eg. h4 against fianchetto's as Gruenfeld),
and so on. Not a revolution as the first spectacular alfa-zero
games seemed to suggest, but anyway certainly a
continuation of the 'Evolution'...
:)

Meanwhile i'll leave possible future new correspondence rules
to the ICCF, wait for LK's book about board options, and in the
meantime maybe program a little on a more b/w equal initial setup
with f2 and c7 removed, possibly also for Crazyhouse chess.

(**) which is not implying that the top-engines can't improve
further eg. in endgame strategy, btw (although maybe there's a
top somewhere around 3900 eg. with rapid time control(s))
jefk

Post Reply