LCZero Elo

[CheckersGuy]

The new net + the new client was about 300 selfplay elo stronger than id 44. Since some ppl were still using the v3 and not the v4 client the elo graph is completly messed up and the elo difference of 55 vs 44. is much lower in the graph.

What does the client version have to do with ELO ?

I meant the engine itself and not the net. Sry

[CMCanavessi]

The new net + the new client was about 300 selfplay elo stronger than id 44. Since some ppl were still using the v3 and not the v4 client the elo graph is completly messed up and the elo difference of 55 vs 44. is much lower in the graph.

What does the client version have to do with ELO ?

The graph in the website is computed by matching new network vs old network. New network is not backwards compatible with old client, and some people were still using old clients and producing inaccurate games. That's why the graph is skewed and does not reflect real life.

[JJJ]

Well, the 6 guys beting on 2000 elo or less are already wrong !

[CMCanavessi]

Well, the 6 guys beting on 2000 elo or less are already wrong !

There will probably be only 3 winners

[peter]

Can't help myself, still being in doubt:

Leela today at online playing site with White and "Hard":
[pgn]
1. e4 d5 2. exd5 e5 3. dxe6 Bxe6 4. Nf3 Nf6 5. d4 Bd6 6. c4 O-O 7. Nc3 Re8 8. Be2 Bxc4 9. Be3 Be6 10. d5 Nxd5 11. Nxd5 Bxd5 12. h3 Bb4+ 13. Bd2 Bc4 14. Bxb4 Rxe2+
[/pgn]

Stopped there, to put it into my little Leela- book, the line for Black just would be long enough already, wouldn't it?

[Uri Blass]

Well, the 6 guys beting on 2000 elo or less are already wrong !

There will probably be only 3 winners

I believe that there will be at least 4 winners who voted a correct reply if this is what you need to win(assuming they are not lying).

The people who voted
"No guess. I dont understand the project."

[peter]

Well, the 6 guys beting on 2000 elo or less are already wrong !

There will probably be only 3 winners

I believe that there will be at least 4 winners who voted a correct reply if this is what you need to win(assuming they are not lying).

The people who voted
"No guess. I dont understand the project."

Thanks, Uri, I'd be one of the winners then too btw.

[AdminX]

Well, the 6 guys beting on 2000 elo or less are already wrong !

There will probably be only 3 winners

She does have potential, but those endgames are in serious need of attention. Below is one of her better days.

[pgn]
[Event "5 Minutes/Game + 3 Seconds/Move"]
[Site "Shredder GUI"]
[Date "2018.04.12"]
[Round "3"]
[White "LCZero v0.5, ID 123.."]
[Black "Maverick 1.5 x64"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "A20"]
[Annotator "Summers Jr.,Ted"]
[PlyCount "105"]
[EventDate "2018.??.??"]

1. c4 {book 0s} e5 {book 0s} 2. a3 {book 0s} d6 {book 0s} 3. e3 {[%eval 17,18]
[%emt 0:00:06]} Nf6 {book 0s} 4. Nc3 {book 0s} Be7 {book 0s} 5. d4 {[%eval 18,
17] [%emt 0:00:05]} O-O {book 0s} 6. Nf3 {[%eval 24,18] [%emt 0:00:07]} e4 {
book 0s} 7. Nd2 {[%eval 29,17] [%emt 0:00:05]} Bf5 {book 0s} 8. h3 {[%eval 26,
18] [%emt 0:00:05]} h5 {[%eval 37,17] [%emt 0:00:10]} 9. g4 {[%eval 42,17]
[%emt 0:00:06] (Be2)} hxg4 {[%eval 30,19] [%emt 0:00:08]} 10. hxg4 {[%eval 48,
18] [%emt 0:00:04]} Bxg4 {[%eval 52,19] [%emt 0:00:10]} 11. Qc2 {[%eval 45,18]
[%emt 0:00:06]} c5 {[%eval 52,18] [%emt 0:00:20]} 12. Ndxe4 {[%eval 59,18]
[%emt 0:00:05]} g6 {[%eval 56,18] [%emt 0:00:07]} 13. Be2 {[%eval 40,18] [%emt
0:00:09]} Bxe2 {[%eval 75,19] [%emt 0:00:34]} 14. Qxe2 {[%eval 47,18] [%emt 0:
00:06]} Nbd7 {[%eval 83,18] [%emt 0:00:09]} 15. Bd2 {[%eval 45,18] [%emt 0:00:
10] (Qf3)} Nxe4 {[%eval 61,19] [%emt 0:00:09]} 16. Nxe4 {[%eval 56,17] [%emt 0:
00:04]} Nf6 {[%eval 111,19] [%emt 0:00:33]} 17. Ng5 {[%eval 43,19] [%emt 0:00:
09] (Ng3)} cxd4 {[%eval 65,17] [%emt 0:00:06]} 18. O-O-O {[%eval 38,18] [%emt
0:00:07] (exd4)} Qc7 {[%eval 61,15] [%emt 0:00:07]} 19. Kb1 {[%eval 35,18]
[%emt 0:00:10]} d5 {[%eval 77,18] [%emt 0:00:18]} 20. cxd5 {[%eval 37,18]
[%emt 0:00:09] (exd4)} Rac8 {[%eval 99,17] [%emt 0:00:19]} 21. e4 {[%eval 32,
18] [%emt 0:00:06] (exd4)} Qc2+ {[%eval -6,18] [%emt 0:00:05]} 22. Ka1 {
[%eval 39,18] [%emt 0:00:06]} Bxa3 {[%eval -13,20] [%emt 0:00:05]} 23. bxa3 {
[%eval 64,17] [%emt 0:00:06]} Rc3 {[%eval -20,20] [%emt 0:00:05]} 24. Bxc3 {
[%eval -14,17] [%emt 0:00:06]} Qxe2 {[%eval -20,22] [%emt 0:00:23]} 25. Bxd4 {
[%eval -10,18] [%emt 0:00:05]} Nh5 {[%eval -32,21] [%emt 0:00:10]} 26. d6 {
[%eval -9,18] [%emt 0:00:04] (Rhe1)} Rd8 {[%eval -48,18] [%emt 0:00:05]} 27.
Bb2 {[%eval 2,18] [%emt 0:00:06] (e5)} a6 {[%eval -15,16] [%emt 0:00:07]} 28.
e5 {[%eval 11,18] [%emt 0:00:11]} Qg4 {[%eval 0,16] [%emt 0:00:07]} 29. f4 {
[%eval 24,18] [%emt 0:00:08] (Rdg1)} Qxf4 {[%eval 256,19] [%emt 0:00:18]} 30.
e6 {[%eval 49,18] [%emt 0:00:06]} Qxg5 {[%eval 253,21] [%emt 0:00:08]} 31. e7 {
[%eval 49,18] [%emt 0:00:04]} Ra8 {[%eval 272,21] [%emt 0:00:15]} 32. Rhe1 {
[%eval 140,17] [%emt 0:00:07] (Rdg1)} Nf6 {[%eval 1241,19] [%emt 0:00:13]} 33.
d7 {[%eval 176,17] [%emt 0:00:05]} Nxd7 {[%eval 1716,20] [%emt 0:00:12]} 34.
Rxd7 {[%eval 201,18] [%emt 0:00:04]} Re8 {[%eval 1906,19] [%emt 0:00:03]} 35.
Rd8 {[%eval 229,18] [%emt 0:00:04]} Qb5 {[%eval 32744,18] [%emt 0:00:07]} 36.
Bf6 {[%eval 264,17] [%emt 0:00:06]} Kh7 {[%eval 32746,19] [%emt 0:00:10]} 37.
Rh1+ {[%eval 281,18] [%emt 0:00:08]} Qh5 {[%eval 32750,18] [%emt 0:00:00]} 38.
Rxh5+ {[%eval 278,18] [%emt 0:00:02]} gxh5 {[%eval 32752,16] [%emt 0:00:00]}
39. Rxe8 {[%eval 287,18] [%emt 0:00:01]} Kg6 {[%eval 32754,14] [%emt 0:00:00]}
40. Rh8 {[%eval 294,19] [%emt 0:00:13] (Rf8)} Kxf6 {[%eval 32754,14] [%emt 0:
00:01]} 41. e8=Q {[%eval 292,18] [%emt 0:00:05]} Kf5 {[%eval 32756,12] [%emt 0:
00:00]} 42. Qxf7+ {[%eval 316,18] [%emt 0:00:11]} Ke4 {[%eval 32758,10] [%emt
0:00:00]} 43. Kb2 {[%eval 317,18] [%emt 0:00:13] (Re8+)} h4 {[%eval 32760,15]
[%emt 0:00:00]} 44. Rxh4+ {[%eval 332,18] [%emt 0:00:13] (Re8+)} Ke5 {[%eval
32758,10] [%emt 0:00:00]} 45. Rf4 {[%eval 336,18] [%emt 0:00:12] (Rh5+)} Kd6 {
[%eval 32760,9] [%emt 0:00:00]} 46. Kc3 {[%eval 342,18] [%emt 0:00:12] (Rf6+)}
Kc5 {[%eval 32762,6] [%emt 0:00:00]} 47. Rf5+ {[%eval 358,18] [%emt 0:00:11]
(Rf6)} Kb6 {[%eval 32758,10] [%emt 0:00:00]} 48. Rf6+ {[%eval 357,18] [%emt 0:
00:11] (Qf6+)} Ka7 {[%eval 32760,8] [%emt 0:00:00]} 49. Qe7 {[%eval 369,18]
[%emt 0:00:10] (Qe6)} a5 {[%eval 32762,6] [%emt 0:00:00]} 50. Rf7 {[%eval 369,
18] [%emt 0:00:10] (Qc5+)} Kb6 {[%eval 32762,6] [%emt 0:00:00]} 51. Kc4 {
[%eval 358,18] [%emt 0:00:09] (Qc7+)} a4 {[%eval 32764,4] [%emt 0:00:00]} 52.
Qxb7+ {[%eval 385,17] [%emt 0:00:06]} Ka5 {[%eval 32766,2] [%emt 0:00:00]} 53.
Qb5# {[%eval 744,16] [%emt 0:00:05] (Qa7+)} 1-0
[/pgn]

[peter]

Hi Ted!

She does have potential, but those endgames are in serious need of attention.

She doesn't have any chance to reach an endgame with these openings she plays.
This isn't tactical weakness only, that's simply no good "positional play" neither, which is always said to be her best side so far.

[pgn]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. e5 Nfd7 5. f4 c5 6. Nf3 cxd4 7. Nxd4 Nc6 8. Be3
Nxd4 9. Bxd4 Nb6 10. Bd3 Bd7 11. O-O Qc7 12. Nb5 Bxb5 13. Bxb5+ Nd7 14. c4 dxc4
15. Rc1 Rd8 16. f5 $18
[/pgn]

That's again from today at online playing site in "Hard" mode, this time with Black.
Game's again already as well as over and out there.

What this thing needs more then anything else at the moment is some kind of opening book or any human player can easily learn a little book of his own against her or give it to an engine and the Elo as well as the Celo (Computer Elo) are never ever near to anything about 2000 at that very moment.

[MonteCarlo]

The existence of lines that Leela completely misplays is unsurprising at this point.

It's maybe somewhere in the 2300s CCRL these days (on strong hardware), which, while impressive given the "zero" start just over a month ago and all the bugs they've dealt with, is still rather weak in the grand scheme of things.

Give me any engine in the 2300s-2400s on CCRL (really could go much higher than that, even), have them play without an opening book at a fast time control, and I'd expect to find lines they're losing by move 15