I Got youy, Norman Brando

[fern]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

[Ovyron]

Interestingly, that sounds just like what Strelka 5.5 does, except it does that for a side that it likes, so it may show very pessimistic score for its own side if it is pushing a supposed advantage for the opponent's side.

[BrendanJNorman]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

[Michael Sherwin]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with. Just a thought.

[BrendanJNorman]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with. Just a thought.

Would definitely be interesting.

I have a couple questions for you, Mike.

1. Would you be able to create a version of Romi which we can tweak the settings in UCI options? I'd love to make it even more positional!

2. Did you see the beautiful win against Alfil Romi achieved? I posted it in my positional engines thread.

[Michael Sherwin]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with. Just a thought.

Would definitely be interesting.

I have a couple questions for you, Mike.

1. Would you be able to create a version of Romi which we can tweak the settings in UCI options? I'd love to make it even more positional!

2. Did you see the beautiful win against Alfil Romi achieved? I posted it in my positional engines thread.

1. Romi is winboard because winboard supports learning with the result command. UCI did not have a result command ten years ago. Has that changed? Given that I have been giving some thought to how a learning engine can skirt around the UCI protocol's interference of engine freedom to learn. With SF in mind (without really knowing very much about SF or UCI) I imagine SF could store the game as it happens in an empty game file. Then on start up or new game SF could look at the game file and if not empty could then incorporate the game into its learn file. As far as Romi and UCI options I do not know if a Winboard/UCI hybrid protocol is possible or not.

2. No I have not seen that game. Was it just Romi or was it Romi+RL? I will take a look.

[Michael Sherwin]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with. Just a thought.

Would definitely be interesting.

I have a couple questions for you, Mike.

1. Would you be able to create a version of Romi which we can tweak the settings in UCI options? I'd love to make it even more positional!

2. Did you see the beautiful win against Alfil Romi achieved? I posted it in my positional engines thread.

1. Romi is winboard because winboard supports learning with the result command. UCI did not have a result command ten years ago. Has that changed? Given that I have been giving some thought to how a learning engine can skirt around the UCI protocol's interference of engine freedom to learn. With SF in mind (without really knowing very much about SF or UCI) I imagine SF could store the game as it happens in an empty game file. Then on start up or new game SF could look at the game file and if not empty could then incorporate the game into its learn file. As far as Romi and UCI options I do not know if a Winboard/UCI hybrid protocol is possible or not.

2. No I have not seen that game. Was it just Romi or was it Romi+RL? I will take a look.

I had a hard time pulling up the game. The pgn tag seems confused. It was only after I clicked on the 0-1 selection that the game came up. It was not as clean as I would have liked but nonetheless it is typical of Romi's games. The way that white's dark squared bishop was made useless reminds me of the A0/SF match. lol

[Ovyron]

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with.

Is that necessary? Or can one just play thousands of games between those engines to produce a big pgn and then make Romi learn from it?

[BrendanJNorman]

I think I have caught at least ONE of the keys of your manipulation of Rodent for your Tal version.
You give the program very optimistic score in position that when played by me with other engines only produce indifferent scores. So, with that optimistic scores, you push the program to follow suit in certain lines even if the supposed advantage is just a supposition, a phantom, BUT doing so is a way to perhaps discover certain chances. Beyond that, I am sure you have made some other things too.

Fern

I don't know...

I simply used the UCI options that Pawel gave us in Rodent, tweaked them in accordance with how I understood Tal's playing style to be...

I then tested it on key positions from Tal's games - especially his most speculative sacrifices - and adjusted accordingly until there was mostly agreement.

I hope you enjoy the misery OpenTal gives us...I've lost countless times against his "bullshit" sacrifices too.

Sometimes, as Pawel has mentioned, he will sacrifice something...and then make a quiet move to remind you that you can't do anything...later he will get bored and kill you.

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with. Just a thought.

Would definitely be interesting.

I have a couple questions for you, Mike.

1. Would you be able to create a version of Romi which we can tweak the settings in UCI options? I'd love to make it even more positional!

2. Did you see the beautiful win against Alfil Romi achieved? I posted it in my positional engines thread.

1. Romi is winboard because winboard supports learning with the result command. UCI did not have a result command ten years ago. Has that changed? Given that I have been giving some thought to how a learning engine can skirt around the UCI protocol's interference of engine freedom to learn. With SF in mind (without really knowing very much about SF or UCI) I imagine SF could store the game as it happens in an empty game file. Then on start up or new game SF could look at the game file and if not empty could then incorporate the game into its learn file. As far as Romi and UCI options I do not know if a Winboard/UCI hybrid protocol is possible or not.

2. No I have not seen that game. Was it just Romi or was it Romi+RL? I will take a look.

I had a hard time pulling up the game. The pgn tag seems confused. It was only after I clicked on the 0-1 selection that the game came up. It was not as clean as I would have liked but nonetheless it is typical of Romi's games. The way that white's dark squared bishop was made useless reminds me of the A0/SF match. lol

I wasn't as impressed by the trapped bishop, as by the knight maneuvering around to blockade on d6 (Na6-c7-e8-d6!). And then angling to reach a position with that knight against white's shitty bishop (Bb7-c8-f5-d3-c4 swapping light squared bishops).

If you've studied Nimzowistch's work, this type of positional "planning" is very impressive coming from an engine.

[Michael Sherwin]

It would be interesting to train RomiChess against these engines a few thousand games and see if Romi will incorporate this style or what antidotes Romi might come up with.

Is that necessary? Or can one just play thousands of games between those engines to produce a big pgn and then make Romi learn from it?

While Romi does benefit from pgn files of other engines or humans it is weak compared to Romi experiencing the games as one of the contestants and guiding those games with her accumulated experience. In short Romi benefits more from discovering what is right for it and no so much what is right for others. But one can certainly start with a merged pgn file and letting Romi learn from that point.