jp wrote: ↑Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:45 am
carldaman wrote: ↑Sun Mar 22, 2020 12:38 am
Engines may not actually plan, but a combination of high-end search and a really good evaluation can produce what looks a lot like plans, for all intents and purposes.
And the more one-sided you make the contest (e.g. give one engine 10 times the computer power of the other), the more it produces what superficially looks like "positional" play.
My convention is to test with 4 cores if the engine supports it. If I had more available, I probably would not use them all because of the diminishing returns. Phalanx is a single-core engine, so it gets ... just one core. I don't test for a rating list, so I'm mostly interested in the stylistic content of the games - or the way the engines conduct their games, in other words.
But, to offer up a game played on equal hardware, here's an encounter with The King (v3.50) that concluded just minutes ago, as if on demand!!
As a bonus, CyberNezh is slightly handicapped by the well-known issue involving The King's use of one core on the opponent's time, but no big deal there.
One rarely gets to witness such a thorough dismantling of the loathed Berlin Defense. [No book was used]
Enjoy.
[pgn]
[Event "12m+8s"]
[Date "2020.03.21"]
[Round "1"]
[White "CyberNezh"]
[Black "The King 3.50"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C67"]
[PlyCount "63"]
{[%evp 0,63,19,38,25,16,14,23,13,36,37,41,10,71,107,-102,47,-86,-96,-13,-137,
-41,-18,-340,-340,-275,-90,-370,-370,-323,-323,-133,0,0,150,-348,-290,-265,
-245,-117,-45,-167,145,-472,-319,-362,149,110,229,239,239,281,399,538,606,648,
406,654,723,443,472,612,922,858,1071,1160]} 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 Nf6 4.
O-O Nxe4 5. d4 exd4 6. Re1 f5 7. Ng5 Bb4 8. Nxe4 Bxe1 9. Bg5 Ne7 10. Qh5+ $1 g6
11. Nd6+ $3 cxd6 12. Qh6 Ng8 13. Qh4 Qb6 14. Na3 Bb4 15. c3 Bxa3 16. Re1+ Kf8
17. Be7+ Kf7 18. Bc4+ d5 19. Bxd5+ Kg7 20. bxa3 h5 21. Qg5 d3 22. c4 Nf6 23.
Bb4 Qd8 24. Re7+ Qxe7 25. Bxe7 Nh7 26. Qe3 Re8 27. Qd4+ Kh6 28. Bb4 d6 29. Qf4+
Kg7 30. Qxd6 Kh6 31. Qf4+ g5 32. Qd6+ 1-0
[/pgn]
OK, but now someone may object that such a contest is still lopsided. However, CyberNezh is far from being a top engine. Its moves are often too risky, bordering on downright unsound - but boy, how they can pay off against a bedazzled opponent. Besides, the most instructive games are often the master vs amateur, or SuperGM vs mere GM affairs.