Na ja!
The "new paradigm" can be seen for "smart" only.
With this the "smart" is smart, is not it?
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
Until game outcome is determined everything is a guess (estimate/extrapolation/approximation).corres wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:23 amI agree but the statistics may change sometimes drastically when a variation was subverted.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:29 am All the same, there is a point of interest here.
We do not onlly wish to understand the result.
We wish (perhaps even more so) to understand the path to the result.
Most of the time, I know by statistics which move is best for a given position. So when I analyze it, I do not care about what but instead why.
O.K. But it is important for an exercising player how high those numbers are.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:48 amUntil game outcome is determined everything is a guess (estimate/extrapolation/approximation).corres wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 9:23 amI agree but the statistics may change sometimes drastically when a variation was subverted.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 8:29 am All the same, there is a point of interest here.
We do not onlly wish to understand the result.
We wish (perhaps even more so) to understand the path to the result.
Most of the time, I know by statistics which move is best for a given position. So when I analyze it, I do not care about what but instead why.
Fair enough. Indeed it is important to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of yourself and your opponents.Ovyron wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:59 am I think that falls outside of the scope of this thread (where I've been claiming you should focus on the relevant chess lines instead of generic chess lines, so if it's "not played as often in engine tournaments" that means the line is generic), but, sure, I'll see what I can do about those lines and we can discuss them in a new thread that I'll create.
Sorry. okay, no.todd wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:17 pmFair enough. Indeed it is important to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of yourself and your opponents.Ovyron wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:59 am I think that falls outside of the scope of this thread (where I've been claiming you should focus on the relevant chess lines instead of generic chess lines, so if it's "not played as often in engine tournaments" that means the line is generic), but, sure, I'll see what I can do about those lines and we can discuss them in a new thread that I'll create.
I don't want to score well with black, because I already score well with black. I eat my cake and have it too
A critical line has Bg5, which means it's white's best try (specially against opponents that don't know black's critical continuation) so that other white alternatives do worse. That's why I believe this has nothing to do with how engines misplay a side, but about equal opponents that know the lines being better avoiding it all as white (1.d4 has a similar line, that's why some people just play 1.c4).
I doubt a human would ever want to play optimal black's defense in the Italian, Stockfish gives +0.50 advantage to white for a reason, it's very difficult for even top engines on fastest hardware to find the correct continuation for black, humans would just be... busted.
a human does not need to find the moves assuming all is home preperation so I believe 2700+ players are going to have motivation to learn the correct lines in order to win.Ovyron wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:50 amSorry. okay, no.todd wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 7:17 pmFair enough. Indeed it is important to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of yourself and your opponents.Ovyron wrote: ↑Fri Jul 12, 2019 12:59 am I think that falls outside of the scope of this thread (where I've been claiming you should focus on the relevant chess lines instead of generic chess lines, so if it's "not played as often in engine tournaments" that means the line is generic), but, sure, I'll see what I can do about those lines and we can discuss them in a new thread that I'll create.
While my backsolved tree graph has a score that is positive for the black side after Ng5, it turns out to be an obscure line, and in practice people don't know how to play against the Traxler... So no way I'm going to put it out in the open so the playing field is leveled, not if my only chance to contend against faster hardware and NNs (I can't run GPU Leela and CPU Leela is cute but hilarious) is powerful uncorked lines, and specially, the person that gave me my private book made me promise that I'd not share it with anyone (they were so worried, they checked back to make sure I understood the implications), so what's the difference if I just go and divulge these lines in public?
But, yes, I'll be contending with the Traxler, because, as it turns out, it's a good variation to play both with white and black, because engines misplay the black side.
I'm copping out.
I don't want to score well with black, because I already score well with black. I eat my cake and have it too
A critical line has Bg5, which means it's white's best try (specially against opponents that don't know black's critical continuation) so that other white alternatives do worse. That's why I believe this has nothing to do with how engines misplay a side, but about equal opponents that know the lines being better avoiding it all as white (1.d4 has a similar line, that's why some people just play 1.c4).
I doubt a human would ever want to play optimal black's defense in the Italian, Stockfish gives +0.50 advantage to white for a reason, it's very difficult for even top engines on fastest hardware to find the correct continuation for black, humans would just be... busted.
All this has been going on for more than a decade, for example, back when Freestyle chess was popular, those players were corking the most powerful opening lines that were seen at that point in history. People were going insane building strong clusters to run Rybka and derivatives that were stronger than it in some lines, looking for anything that would give them the edge against the competition.
I do not think that it is useless for humans and getting an advantage increase chances to win.Ovyron wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 9:36 amAll this has been going on for more than a decade, for example, back when Freestyle chess was popular, those players were corking the most powerful opening lines that were seen at that point in history. People were going insane building strong clusters to run Rybka and derivatives that were stronger than it in some lines, looking for anything that would give them the edge against the competition.
What was absent was a GM looking at this, or caring (what was there were very strong human players where their chess knowledge was useless against the strongest centaurs, which was in part responsible for freestyle's death as it was won by the unknowns). The humans had their own preparation and it has nothing to do with what is best on corr chess, freestyle chess, or engine matches. Now and then the GMs will play a variation that appeared previously on some famous engine game, but this is rare.
The difference in strength is so enormous between engines and humans, that the best possible moves engines can play are useless to them, just like 1600 elo patzers would find useless to memorize and play GM lines like parrots just to lose because they didn't notice their Bishop was hanging on the next move.
Keeping a promise is not "copping out."Ovyron wrote: ↑Sun Jul 14, 2019 8:50 am is powerful uncorked lines, and specially, the person that gave me my private book made me promise that I'd not share it with anyone (they were so worried, they checked back to make sure I understood the implications), so what's the difference if I just go and divulge these lines in public?
But, yes, I'll be contending with the Traxler, because, as it turns out, it's a good variation to play both with white and black, because engines misplay the black side.
I'm copping out.
What if the best line for black includes sacrificing a pawn, and both exchanges (you keep the Bishop pair, so it's knights for rooks), so you end with huge material deficit in a position you have no idea how to continue? That's the kind of stuff I'm seeing, if GMs hire people to keep them up to date about latest opening theory, and you don't see these lines at top level play, it's because these lines are useless at the human level, because they're way too complex and it's hard to know what's going on (even engines get confused.) Top GMs are best playing into positions that they know how to play, and it wouldn't matter to them how Stockfish or Leela plays them. The best positions against engines are not the same as against humans.
1. f3 e5 2. Kf2 is also a draw with correct play. What matters is when theory ends and a novelty is played forcing you to think, what side of the board would you rather play. The "true score" would be positive if you'd pick white, and negative if you'd pick black. There's an objective best choice, and the position being a tablebase draw (correct play?) is irrelevant, because we don't have 32men tbs.zullil wrote:Common sense tells us that 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bc4 is a draw with correct play.