Uri Blass wrote: ↑Sun Nov 03, 2019 1:56 amI think that even in the last case they can generalize from their experience against engines and play correctly moves that they know to be good in similiar situations.
Engines and humans play so completely different chess that even if you get a variation where you perform relatively well against engines they might be useless against humans.
I tried this back in Rebel Decade times, because I could beat the engine at Depth 6. So what I did was using the same openings and moves I was using to defeat Rebel Depth 6 against humans. The result was that I performed worse against humans than with my usual repertoire, because humans played nothing like Rebel, and they wouldn't play the blunders that were allowing me to beat Rebel, so it was useless.
That does not mean that the humans are better than Rebel that was dumped to depth 6 ....
It's just that the humans compared to Rebel were playing at a higher depth relatively speaking .....
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
Ovyron wrote: ↑Mon Jul 06, 2020 7:55 am
The second game where the "Busted Italian" lines were put to the test at correspondence time controls just finished:
While black has thus failed to reach any line with an edge, white hasn't been able to get an eval above 0.00 either.
7...Bb6 is an interesting move in that it was mentioned by Hikaru Nakamura in one of his videos (he calls it the best move, so these lines are known by elite players. As a human I really don't understand why Bc5-Bb6-Ba7 is so good... why not just Ba7? Why can't white take advantage of the lost tempi?)
The third game is underway and I really hope white can get an edge and refute these defenses, because I already played the best black had and couldn't flip the tables, the only interesting thing remaining is to see black's defenses being cracked.
FWIW, both Cfish-dev and Lc0 (Network 384x30-t60-4300) suggest 15. d4 rather than Nc4.
15.d4 is 0.00 (like 15.Nc4 but it took my opponent more than 11 days of analysis to see that 15.Nc4 is 0.00), anybody thinking otherwise is welcome to jump in
I wonder how long would an unassisted engine need to see this correct score...
Ovyron wrote: ↑Tue Jul 07, 2020 11:55 pm
15.d4 is 0.00 (like 15.Nc4 but it took my opponent more than 11 days of analysis to see that 15.Nc4 is 0.00), anybody thinking otherwise is welcome to jump in
I wonder how long would an unassisted engine need to see this correct score...
Wrong. It took 11 days to find d4 and all sub variations is 0.00 so i opted for non main line move Nc4 and delayed d4 with suitable preparation.
Master Om wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:51 pm
Wrong. It took 11 days to find d4 and all sub variations is 0.00 so i opted for non main line move Nc4 and delayed d4 with suitable preparation.
And now you've been preparing 1.e4 for 2 weeks.
Your beliefs create your reality, so be careful what you wish for.
Master Om wrote: ↑Mon Jul 13, 2020 3:51 pm
Wrong. It took 11 days to find d4 and all sub variations is 0.00 so i opted for non main line move Nc4 and delayed d4 with suitable preparation.
And now you've been preparing 1.e4 for 2 weeks.
NO. I have about more than 20 games ICCF and 5 games of AICCF. Hence not able to get cpu time to analyse and play. Will play in a day.
Master Om wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:52 pm
NO. I have about more than 20 games ICCF and 5 games of AICCF. Hence not able to get cpu time to analyse and play. Will play in a day.
That's fine, take as much time as you need, that's why we don't have clocks. I was just friendly teasing
Master Om wrote: ↑Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:52 pm
NO. I have about more than 20 games ICCF and 5 games of AICCF. Hence not able to get cpu time to analyse and play. Will play in a day.
That's fine, take as much time as you need, that's why we don't have clocks. I was just friendly teasing