What are Stockfish and Komodo estimated rating for these 5 depths ?

[Chessqueen]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?

Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.

Here is at depth 7 Jorge was a little bit too much for Komodo 13.3 Time Control 10 + 5 sec increment, I just lost another $50.00
https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=5300363

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "DESKTOP-OFQ3C0P"]
[Date "2020.07.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Komodo-13.3-64bit"]
[Black "Jorge Sammour"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "2458"]
[ECO "B02"]
[Opening "Alekhine"]
[Time "18:11:03"]
[Variation "Two Pawns Attack, 5.Nc3"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "86"]


1. e4 {(e2-e4 Nb8-c6 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e4xd5) +0.38/8 0} Nf6 2. e5
{(e4-e5 Nf6-d5 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 c2-c4 Nd5-b4 Nb1-c3 d7-d5) +0.89/8 0} Nd5 3. c4
{(c2-c4 Nd5-b4 a2-a3 Nb4-c6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e5xd6/ep e7xd6) +0.89/8} Nb6 4. c5
{(c4-c5 Nb6-d5 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8 0} Nd5 5.
Nc3 {(Nb1-c3 Nd5xc3 d2xc3 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 e7-e6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8} e6 6.
d4 {(d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Nc3xd5 e6xd5 Ng1-f3 d7-d6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +0.87/8 0} d6 7.
Ne4 {(Nc3-e4 Nb8-c6 Bc1-g5) +0.84/8 0} dxe5 8. dxe5 {(d4xe5 Nb8-d7 Bc1-g5)
+0.45/8 0} Nd7 9. Nf3 {(Ng1-f3 Nd7xc5 Bf1-d3 Nc5xd3+ Qd1xd3 Bf8-b4+ Bc1-d2
Bb4xd2+ Ne4xd2 O-O O-O Nd5-b4) +0.45/8} Nxc5 10. Nxc5 {(Ne4xc5 Bf8xc5
Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 Nb6-d5 Bc1-d2) +0.45/8} Bxc5 11. Bc4
{(Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 f7-f6 Bc1-d2 Nb6-d7 e5xf6) +0.45/8}
Be7 12. O-O {(O-O O-O Bc4-d3) +0.03/8 0} c5 13. Qb3 {(Qd1-b3 O-O Rf1-d1
Qd8-d7 Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Rd1xd5 Qd7-e6) +0.32/8 0} O-O 14. Rd1 {(Rf1-d1 Qd8-b6
Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Qb3xd5 Bc8-f5 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) +0.32/8} b6 15. Bd2 {(Bc1-d2
Bc8-b7 Qb3-d3 h7-h6 a2-a4 Qd8-e8 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) -0.15/8 0} a5 16. a4 {(a2-a4
Bc8-a6 Bc4xa6 Ra8xa6 Qb3-d3 Ra6-a7 h2-h3 Ra7-d7) -0.37/8 0} Bb7 17. Bb5
{(Bc4-b5 Bb7-a6 Bb5xa6 Ra8xa6 Kg1-h1 h7-h6 h2-h3 Ra6-a7) -0.42/8 0} Qc7 18.
Qc2 {(Qb3-c2 Ra8-d8 Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8) -0.58/8 0} Rfd8 19.
Ng5 {(Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8 Ra8xd8 Qc2-e2 Qe5-f4) -0.36/8 0}
g6 20. Qe4 {(Qc2-e4 Nd5-c3 Qe4-f4 Be7xg5 Qf4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Rd8-d4)
-1.49/8 0} Nc3 21. Qh4 {(Qe4-h4 Be7xg5 Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3
Bc6xb5) -1.49/8} Bxg5 22. Qxg5 {(Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3 Bc6xb5
a4xb5 Rd8-d5) -1.49/8} Nxd1 23. Rxd1 {(Ra1xd1 Rd8-d5 f2-f3 Qc7xe5 Qg5xe5
Rd5xe5 h2-h3 Re5-d5) -1.49/8} Bc6 24. Bxc6 {(Bb5xc6 Qc7xc6 Qg5-f4 Rd8-d5
g2-g3 Ra8-d8 Qf4-e4 c5-c4) -2.91/8 0} Qxc6 25. Ra1 {(Rd1-a1 Rd8-d5 b2-b3)
-2.91/8} Qd5 26. Be1 {(Bd2-e1 Qd5-d4 Qg5-c1 Qd4xe5 Be1-c3 Qe5-e2 Bc3-f6
Rd8-d5) -3.68/8 0} Qb3 27. Qc1 {(Qg5-c1 Rd8-d5 Qc1-c3 Qb3xc3 Be1xc3 Ra8-d8
f2-f3 Kg8-g7) -3.52/8 0} Rd3 28. f3 {(f2-f3 Ra8-d8 Ra1-a3 Qb3-d1 Qc1xd1
Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Ra3-e3) -3.68/8 0} Rad8 29. Ra3 {(Ra1-a3 Qb3-d5 Ra3xd3
Qd5xd3 Qc1-g5 Rd8-d4 Qg5-f6 Qd3-e3+ Kg1-f1) -3.68/8 0} Qd1 30. Qxd1
{(Qc1xd1 Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 Rd1-c1 Kf2-e3 Rc1-c2) -3.35/8 0} Rxd1
31. Kf2 {(Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 c5-c4 b2-b3 Rd5-c5 b3xc4 Rc5xc4) -3.35/8 0}
Rc1 32. Rb3 {(Ra3-b3 Rd8-d4 Rb3xb6 Rd4xa4 h2-h3 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rc1-c2+
Kf2-f1) -3.20/8 0} Rdd1 33. Bc3 {(Be1-c3 Rc1-c2+ Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2 Rb6-b5) -2.98/8 0} Rc2+ 34. Ke3 {(Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 Rb6-b5 h7-h5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2) -2.98/8} c4 35. Rxb6 {(Rb3xb6 Rd1-d3+
Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rg2-h2 Rb5xa5) -3.23/8 0} Rd3+ 36. Kf4
{(Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4) -3.23/8} Rxg2 37. h4 {(h2-h4 Rg2-f2 Rb6-b5 Rd3xf3+
Kf4-e4 Rf3-f4+ Ke4-e3 Rf2-f3+ Ke3-e2 Rf3-d3 Rb5xa5 Rf4xh4) -3.23/8} h6 38.
Ke4 {(Kf4-e4 Rg2-e2+ Ke4-f4 Re2-f2 Kf4-e4 Rf2xf3 Rb6-c6 Rf3-e3+ Ke4-f4
Re3-h3) -3.98/8 0} g5 39. hxg5 {(h4xg5 h6xg5 Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7 Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8
Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 0} hxg5 40. Rb8+ {(Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7
Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kg7 41. Rg8+ {(Rb8-g8+
Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kxg8 42. Bd4 {(Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+
Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Re2+ 43. Be3 {(Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 White resigns}
Rexe3# 0-1[/pgn]

[lkaufman]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?

Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.

Here is at depth 7 Jorge was a little bit too much for Komodo 13.3 Time Control 10 + 5 sec increment, I just lost another $50.00
https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=5300363

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "DESKTOP-OFQ3C0P"]
[Date "2020.07.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Komodo-13.3-64bit"]
[Black "Jorge Sammour"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "2458"]
[ECO "B02"]
[Opening "Alekhine"]
[Time "18:11:03"]
[Variation "Two Pawns Attack, 5.Nc3"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "86"]


1. e4 {(e2-e4 Nb8-c6 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e4xd5) +0.38/8 0} Nf6 2. e5
{(e4-e5 Nf6-d5 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 c2-c4 Nd5-b4 Nb1-c3 d7-d5) +0.89/8 0} Nd5 3. c4
{(c2-c4 Nd5-b4 a2-a3 Nb4-c6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e5xd6/ep e7xd6) +0.89/8} Nb6 4. c5
{(c4-c5 Nb6-d5 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8 0} Nd5 5.
Nc3 {(Nb1-c3 Nd5xc3 d2xc3 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 e7-e6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8} e6 6.
d4 {(d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Nc3xd5 e6xd5 Ng1-f3 d7-d6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +0.87/8 0} d6 7.
Ne4 {(Nc3-e4 Nb8-c6 Bc1-g5) +0.84/8 0} dxe5 8. dxe5 {(d4xe5 Nb8-d7 Bc1-g5)
+0.45/8 0} Nd7 9. Nf3 {(Ng1-f3 Nd7xc5 Bf1-d3 Nc5xd3+ Qd1xd3 Bf8-b4+ Bc1-d2
Bb4xd2+ Ne4xd2 O-O O-O Nd5-b4) +0.45/8} Nxc5 10. Nxc5 {(Ne4xc5 Bf8xc5
Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 Nb6-d5 Bc1-d2) +0.45/8} Bxc5 11. Bc4
{(Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 f7-f6 Bc1-d2 Nb6-d7 e5xf6) +0.45/8}
Be7 12. O-O {(O-O O-O Bc4-d3) +0.03/8 0} c5 13. Qb3 {(Qd1-b3 O-O Rf1-d1
Qd8-d7 Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Rd1xd5 Qd7-e6) +0.32/8 0} O-O 14. Rd1 {(Rf1-d1 Qd8-b6
Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Qb3xd5 Bc8-f5 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) +0.32/8} b6 15. Bd2 {(Bc1-d2
Bc8-b7 Qb3-d3 h7-h6 a2-a4 Qd8-e8 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) -0.15/8 0} a5 16. a4 {(a2-a4
Bc8-a6 Bc4xa6 Ra8xa6 Qb3-d3 Ra6-a7 h2-h3 Ra7-d7) -0.37/8 0} Bb7 17. Bb5
{(Bc4-b5 Bb7-a6 Bb5xa6 Ra8xa6 Kg1-h1 h7-h6 h2-h3 Ra6-a7) -0.42/8 0} Qc7 18.
Qc2 {(Qb3-c2 Ra8-d8 Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8) -0.58/8 0} Rfd8 19.
Ng5 {(Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8 Ra8xd8 Qc2-e2 Qe5-f4) -0.36/8 0}
g6 20. Qe4 {(Qc2-e4 Nd5-c3 Qe4-f4 Be7xg5 Qf4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Rd8-d4)
-1.49/8 0} Nc3 21. Qh4 {(Qe4-h4 Be7xg5 Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3
Bc6xb5) -1.49/8} Bxg5 22. Qxg5 {(Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3 Bc6xb5
a4xb5 Rd8-d5) -1.49/8} Nxd1 23. Rxd1 {(Ra1xd1 Rd8-d5 f2-f3 Qc7xe5 Qg5xe5
Rd5xe5 h2-h3 Re5-d5) -1.49/8} Bc6 24. Bxc6 {(Bb5xc6 Qc7xc6 Qg5-f4 Rd8-d5
g2-g3 Ra8-d8 Qf4-e4 c5-c4) -2.91/8 0} Qxc6 25. Ra1 {(Rd1-a1 Rd8-d5 b2-b3)
-2.91/8} Qd5 26. Be1 {(Bd2-e1 Qd5-d4 Qg5-c1 Qd4xe5 Be1-c3 Qe5-e2 Bc3-f6
Rd8-d5) -3.68/8 0} Qb3 27. Qc1 {(Qg5-c1 Rd8-d5 Qc1-c3 Qb3xc3 Be1xc3 Ra8-d8
f2-f3 Kg8-g7) -3.52/8 0} Rd3 28. f3 {(f2-f3 Ra8-d8 Ra1-a3 Qb3-d1 Qc1xd1
Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Ra3-e3) -3.68/8 0} Rad8 29. Ra3 {(Ra1-a3 Qb3-d5 Ra3xd3
Qd5xd3 Qc1-g5 Rd8-d4 Qg5-f6 Qd3-e3+ Kg1-f1) -3.68/8 0} Qd1 30. Qxd1
{(Qc1xd1 Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 Rd1-c1 Kf2-e3 Rc1-c2) -3.35/8 0} Rxd1
31. Kf2 {(Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 c5-c4 b2-b3 Rd5-c5 b3xc4 Rc5xc4) -3.35/8 0}
Rc1 32. Rb3 {(Ra3-b3 Rd8-d4 Rb3xb6 Rd4xa4 h2-h3 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rc1-c2+
Kf2-f1) -3.20/8 0} Rdd1 33. Bc3 {(Be1-c3 Rc1-c2+ Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2 Rb6-b5) -2.98/8 0} Rc2+ 34. Ke3 {(Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 Rb6-b5 h7-h5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2) -2.98/8} c4 35. Rxb6 {(Rb3xb6 Rd1-d3+
Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rg2-h2 Rb5xa5) -3.23/8 0} Rd3+ 36. Kf4
{(Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4) -3.23/8} Rxg2 37. h4 {(h2-h4 Rg2-f2 Rb6-b5 Rd3xf3+
Kf4-e4 Rf3-f4+ Ke4-e3 Rf2-f3+ Ke3-e2 Rf3-d3 Rb5xa5 Rf4xh4) -3.23/8} h6 38.
Ke4 {(Kf4-e4 Rg2-e2+ Ke4-f4 Re2-f2 Kf4-e4 Rf2xf3 Rb6-c6 Rf3-e3+ Ke4-f4
Re3-h3) -3.98/8 0} g5 39. hxg5 {(h4xg5 h6xg5 Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7 Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8
Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 0} hxg5 40. Rb8+ {(Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7
Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kg7 41. Rg8+ {(Rb8-g8+
Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kxg8 42. Bd4 {(Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+
Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Re2+ 43. Be3 {(Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 White resigns}
Rexe3# 0-1[/pgn]

You must have done something wrong. Several clues:
1. You say it was a depth 7 game, but all the evals show depth 8.
2. The evals are in general not even close to what I show for the same version at either depth 7 or 8.
3. The blunder 20.Qe4??; my Komodo 13.3 makes this blunder only at 1 or 2 ply; at depth 3 or above it sees the problem and avoids it.
4. How did you set a time limit for him in the GUI while still getting Komodo to play 7 (or 8) ply? What GUI permits this?
5. If you had MCTS on, fixed depth doesn't work right at all, but even then I can't get the blunder you got.
I don't know what you did, but apparently it wasn't playing better than depth 2! I think you just wasted $50.
p.s. I just noticed that Stockfish 11 makes the 20.Qe4?? blunder even at 8 ply (!!), did you somehow switch to Stockfish? It is much weaker than Komodo at single digit fixed depth (at one ply 33 elo weaker per my test, but hundreds of elo around 5 ply).

[Chessqueen]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?

Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.

Here is at depth 7 Jorge was a little bit too much for Komodo 13.3 Time Control 10 + 5 sec increment, I just lost another $50.00
https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=5300363

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "DESKTOP-OFQ3C0P"]
[Date "2020.07.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Komodo-13.3-64bit"]
[Black "Jorge Sammour"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "2458"]
[ECO "B02"]
[Opening "Alekhine"]
[Time "18:11:03"]
[Variation "Two Pawns Attack, 5.Nc3"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "86"]


1. e4 {(e2-e4 Nb8-c6 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e4xd5) +0.38/8 0} Nf6 2. e5
{(e4-e5 Nf6-d5 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 c2-c4 Nd5-b4 Nb1-c3 d7-d5) +0.89/8 0} Nd5 3. c4
{(c2-c4 Nd5-b4 a2-a3 Nb4-c6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e5xd6/ep e7xd6) +0.89/8} Nb6 4. c5
{(c4-c5 Nb6-d5 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8 0} Nd5 5.
Nc3 {(Nb1-c3 Nd5xc3 d2xc3 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 e7-e6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8} e6 6.
d4 {(d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Nc3xd5 e6xd5 Ng1-f3 d7-d6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +0.87/8 0} d6 7.
Ne4 {(Nc3-e4 Nb8-c6 Bc1-g5) +0.84/8 0} dxe5 8. dxe5 {(d4xe5 Nb8-d7 Bc1-g5)
+0.45/8 0} Nd7 9. Nf3 {(Ng1-f3 Nd7xc5 Bf1-d3 Nc5xd3+ Qd1xd3 Bf8-b4+ Bc1-d2
Bb4xd2+ Ne4xd2 O-O O-O Nd5-b4) +0.45/8} Nxc5 10. Nxc5 {(Ne4xc5 Bf8xc5
Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 Nb6-d5 Bc1-d2) +0.45/8} Bxc5 11. Bc4
{(Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 f7-f6 Bc1-d2 Nb6-d7 e5xf6) +0.45/8}
Be7 12. O-O {(O-O O-O Bc4-d3) +0.03/8 0} c5 13. Qb3 {(Qd1-b3 O-O Rf1-d1
Qd8-d7 Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Rd1xd5 Qd7-e6) +0.32/8 0} O-O 14. Rd1 {(Rf1-d1 Qd8-b6
Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Qb3xd5 Bc8-f5 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) +0.32/8} b6 15. Bd2 {(Bc1-d2
Bc8-b7 Qb3-d3 h7-h6 a2-a4 Qd8-e8 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) -0.15/8 0} a5 16. a4 {(a2-a4
Bc8-a6 Bc4xa6 Ra8xa6 Qb3-d3 Ra6-a7 h2-h3 Ra7-d7) -0.37/8 0} Bb7 17. Bb5
{(Bc4-b5 Bb7-a6 Bb5xa6 Ra8xa6 Kg1-h1 h7-h6 h2-h3 Ra6-a7) -0.42/8 0} Qc7 18.
Qc2 {(Qb3-c2 Ra8-d8 Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8) -0.58/8 0} Rfd8 19.
Ng5 {(Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8 Ra8xd8 Qc2-e2 Qe5-f4) -0.36/8 0}
g6 20. Qe4 {(Qc2-e4 Nd5-c3 Qe4-f4 Be7xg5 Qf4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Rd8-d4)
-1.49/8 0} Nc3 21. Qh4 {(Qe4-h4 Be7xg5 Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3
Bc6xb5) -1.49/8} Bxg5 22. Qxg5 {(Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3 Bc6xb5
a4xb5 Rd8-d5) -1.49/8} Nxd1 23. Rxd1 {(Ra1xd1 Rd8-d5 f2-f3 Qc7xe5 Qg5xe5
Rd5xe5 h2-h3 Re5-d5) -1.49/8} Bc6 24. Bxc6 {(Bb5xc6 Qc7xc6 Qg5-f4 Rd8-d5
g2-g3 Ra8-d8 Qf4-e4 c5-c4) -2.91/8 0} Qxc6 25. Ra1 {(Rd1-a1 Rd8-d5 b2-b3)
-2.91/8} Qd5 26. Be1 {(Bd2-e1 Qd5-d4 Qg5-c1 Qd4xe5 Be1-c3 Qe5-e2 Bc3-f6
Rd8-d5) -3.68/8 0} Qb3 27. Qc1 {(Qg5-c1 Rd8-d5 Qc1-c3 Qb3xc3 Be1xc3 Ra8-d8
f2-f3 Kg8-g7) -3.52/8 0} Rd3 28. f3 {(f2-f3 Ra8-d8 Ra1-a3 Qb3-d1 Qc1xd1
Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Ra3-e3) -3.68/8 0} Rad8 29. Ra3 {(Ra1-a3 Qb3-d5 Ra3xd3
Qd5xd3 Qc1-g5 Rd8-d4 Qg5-f6 Qd3-e3+ Kg1-f1) -3.68/8 0} Qd1 30. Qxd1
{(Qc1xd1 Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 Rd1-c1 Kf2-e3 Rc1-c2) -3.35/8 0} Rxd1
31. Kf2 {(Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 c5-c4 b2-b3 Rd5-c5 b3xc4 Rc5xc4) -3.35/8 0}
Rc1 32. Rb3 {(Ra3-b3 Rd8-d4 Rb3xb6 Rd4xa4 h2-h3 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rc1-c2+
Kf2-f1) -3.20/8 0} Rdd1 33. Bc3 {(Be1-c3 Rc1-c2+ Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2 Rb6-b5) -2.98/8 0} Rc2+ 34. Ke3 {(Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 Rb6-b5 h7-h5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2) -2.98/8} c4 35. Rxb6 {(Rb3xb6 Rd1-d3+
Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rg2-h2 Rb5xa5) -3.23/8 0} Rd3+ 36. Kf4
{(Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4) -3.23/8} Rxg2 37. h4 {(h2-h4 Rg2-f2 Rb6-b5 Rd3xf3+
Kf4-e4 Rf3-f4+ Ke4-e3 Rf2-f3+ Ke3-e2 Rf3-d3 Rb5xa5 Rf4xh4) -3.23/8} h6 38.
Ke4 {(Kf4-e4 Rg2-e2+ Ke4-f4 Re2-f2 Kf4-e4 Rf2xf3 Rb6-c6 Rf3-e3+ Ke4-f4
Re3-h3) -3.98/8 0} g5 39. hxg5 {(h4xg5 h6xg5 Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7 Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8
Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 0} hxg5 40. Rb8+ {(Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7
Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kg7 41. Rg8+ {(Rb8-g8+
Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kxg8 42. Bd4 {(Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+
Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Re2+ 43. Be3 {(Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 White resigns}
Rexe3# 0-1[/pgn]

You must have done something wrong. Several clues:
1. You say it was a depth 7 game, but all the evals show depth 8.
2. The evals are in general not even close to what I show for the same version at either depth 7 or 8.
3. The blunder 20.Qe4??; my Komodo 13.3 makes this blunder only at 1 or 2 ply; at depth 3 or above it sees the problem and avoids it.
4. How did you set a time limit for him in the GUI while still getting Komodo to play 7 (or 8) ply? What GUI permits this?
5. If you had MCTS on, fixed depth doesn't work right at all, but even then I can't get the blunder you got.
I don't know what you did, but apparently it wasn't playing better than depth 2! I think you just wasted $50.
p.s. I just noticed that Stockfish 11 makes the 20.Qe4?? blunder even at 8 ply (!!), did you somehow switch to Stockfish? It is much weaker than Komodo at single digit fixed depth (at one ply 33 elo weaker per my test, but hundreds of elo around 5 ply).

It could be because I used the Arena GUI, I noticed that the Time control was messed up, But Jorge agree to play another game and this game would be cancelled as if never happened. You are correct I checked the Depth and it is still set to 8 but the time control for some reason was messed up. Something is wrong with my Arena 3.5 GUI. Anyway I will be able to play this game with Jorge another time when I figure what GUI better than Arena 3.5 should I use.

[lkaufman]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?

Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.

Here is at depth 7 Jorge was a little bit too much for Komodo 13.3 Time Control 10 + 5 sec increment, I just lost another $50.00
https://ratings.fide.com/card.phtml?event=5300363

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "DESKTOP-OFQ3C0P"]
[Date "2020.07.26"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Komodo-13.3-64bit"]
[Black "Jorge Sammour"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "2458"]
[ECO "B02"]
[Opening "Alekhine"]
[Time "18:11:03"]
[Variation "Two Pawns Attack, 5.Nc3"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "86"]


1. e4 {(e2-e4 Nb8-c6 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e4xd5) +0.38/8 0} Nf6 2. e5
{(e4-e5 Nf6-d5 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 c2-c4 Nd5-b4 Nb1-c3 d7-d5) +0.89/8 0} Nd5 3. c4
{(c2-c4 Nd5-b4 a2-a3 Nb4-c6 d2-d4 d7-d5 e5xd6/ep e7xd6) +0.89/8} Nb6 4. c5
{(c4-c5 Nb6-d5 Nb1-c3 e7-e6 d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8 0} Nd5 5.
Nc3 {(Nb1-c3 Nd5xc3 d2xc3 Nb8-c6 Ng1-f3 e7-e6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +1.02/8} e6 6.
d4 {(d2-d4 Nb8-c6 Nc3xd5 e6xd5 Ng1-f3 d7-d6 Bc1-g5 Bf8-e7) +0.87/8 0} d6 7.
Ne4 {(Nc3-e4 Nb8-c6 Bc1-g5) +0.84/8 0} dxe5 8. dxe5 {(d4xe5 Nb8-d7 Bc1-g5)
+0.45/8 0} Nd7 9. Nf3 {(Ng1-f3 Nd7xc5 Bf1-d3 Nc5xd3+ Qd1xd3 Bf8-b4+ Bc1-d2
Bb4xd2+ Ne4xd2 O-O O-O Nd5-b4) +0.45/8} Nxc5 10. Nxc5 {(Ne4xc5 Bf8xc5
Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 Nb6-d5 Bc1-d2) +0.45/8} Bxc5 11. Bc4
{(Bf1-c4 Nd5-b6 Qd1xd8+ Ke8xd8 Bc4-d3 f7-f6 Bc1-d2 Nb6-d7 e5xf6) +0.45/8}
Be7 12. O-O {(O-O O-O Bc4-d3) +0.03/8 0} c5 13. Qb3 {(Qd1-b3 O-O Rf1-d1
Qd8-d7 Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Rd1xd5 Qd7-e6) +0.32/8 0} O-O 14. Rd1 {(Rf1-d1 Qd8-b6
Bc4xd5 e6xd5 Qb3xd5 Bc8-f5 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) +0.32/8} b6 15. Bd2 {(Bc1-d2
Bc8-b7 Qb3-d3 h7-h6 a2-a4 Qd8-e8 h2-h3 Ra8-d8) -0.15/8 0} a5 16. a4 {(a2-a4
Bc8-a6 Bc4xa6 Ra8xa6 Qb3-d3 Ra6-a7 h2-h3 Ra7-d7) -0.37/8 0} Bb7 17. Bb5
{(Bc4-b5 Bb7-a6 Bb5xa6 Ra8xa6 Kg1-h1 h7-h6 h2-h3 Ra6-a7) -0.42/8 0} Qc7 18.
Qc2 {(Qb3-c2 Ra8-d8 Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8) -0.58/8 0} Rfd8 19.
Ng5 {(Nf3-g5 Be7xg5 Bd2xg5 Qc7xe5 Bg5xd8 Ra8xd8 Qc2-e2 Qe5-f4) -0.36/8 0}
g6 20. Qe4 {(Qc2-e4 Nd5-c3 Qe4-f4 Be7xg5 Qf4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Rd8-d4)
-1.49/8 0} Nc3 21. Qh4 {(Qe4-h4 Be7xg5 Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3
Bc6xb5) -1.49/8} Bxg5 22. Qxg5 {(Qh4xg5 Nc3xd1 Ra1xd1 Bb7-c6 f2-f3 Bc6xb5
a4xb5 Rd8-d5) -1.49/8} Nxd1 23. Rxd1 {(Ra1xd1 Rd8-d5 f2-f3 Qc7xe5 Qg5xe5
Rd5xe5 h2-h3 Re5-d5) -1.49/8} Bc6 24. Bxc6 {(Bb5xc6 Qc7xc6 Qg5-f4 Rd8-d5
g2-g3 Ra8-d8 Qf4-e4 c5-c4) -2.91/8 0} Qxc6 25. Ra1 {(Rd1-a1 Rd8-d5 b2-b3)
-2.91/8} Qd5 26. Be1 {(Bd2-e1 Qd5-d4 Qg5-c1 Qd4xe5 Be1-c3 Qe5-e2 Bc3-f6
Rd8-d5) -3.68/8 0} Qb3 27. Qc1 {(Qg5-c1 Rd8-d5 Qc1-c3 Qb3xc3 Be1xc3 Ra8-d8
f2-f3 Kg8-g7) -3.52/8 0} Rd3 28. f3 {(f2-f3 Ra8-d8 Ra1-a3 Qb3-d1 Qc1xd1
Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Ra3-e3) -3.68/8 0} Rad8 29. Ra3 {(Ra1-a3 Qb3-d5 Ra3xd3
Qd5xd3 Qc1-g5 Rd8-d4 Qg5-f6 Qd3-e3+ Kg1-f1) -3.68/8 0} Qd1 30. Qxd1
{(Qc1xd1 Rd3xd1 Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 Rd1-c1 Kf2-e3 Rc1-c2) -3.35/8 0} Rxd1
31. Kf2 {(Kg1-f2 Rd8-d5 Be1-c3 c5-c4 b2-b3 Rd5-c5 b3xc4 Rc5xc4) -3.35/8 0}
Rc1 32. Rb3 {(Ra3-b3 Rd8-d4 Rb3xb6 Rd4xa4 h2-h3 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rc1-c2+
Kf2-f1) -3.20/8 0} Rdd1 33. Bc3 {(Be1-c3 Rc1-c2+ Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2 Rb6-b5) -2.98/8 0} Rc2+ 34. Ke3 {(Kf2-e3 Rc2xg2 Rb3xb6
Rd1-d5 Rb6-b5 h7-h5 h2-h3 Rg2-h2) -2.98/8} c4 35. Rxb6 {(Rb3xb6 Rd1-d3+
Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4 Kg8-g7 Rb6-b5 Rg2-h2 Rb5xa5) -3.23/8 0} Rd3+ 36. Kf4
{(Ke3-f4 Rc2xg2 h2-h4) -3.23/8} Rxg2 37. h4 {(h2-h4 Rg2-f2 Rb6-b5 Rd3xf3+
Kf4-e4 Rf3-f4+ Ke4-e3 Rf2-f3+ Ke3-e2 Rf3-d3 Rb5xa5 Rf4xh4) -3.23/8} h6 38.
Ke4 {(Kf4-e4 Rg2-e2+ Ke4-f4 Re2-f2 Kf4-e4 Rf2xf3 Rb6-c6 Rf3-e3+ Ke4-f4
Re3-h3) -3.98/8 0} g5 39. hxg5 {(h4xg5 h6xg5 Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7 Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8
Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 0} hxg5 40. Rb8+ {(Rb6-b8+ Kg8-g7
Rb8-g8+ Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kg7 41. Rg8+ {(Rb8-g8+
Kg7xg8 Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+ Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Kxg8 42. Bd4 {(Bc3-d4 Rg2-e2+
Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8} Re2+ 43. Be3 {(Bd4-e3 Re2xe3+) -M5/8 White resigns}
Rexe3# 0-1[/pgn]

You must have done something wrong. Several clues:
1. You say it was a depth 7 game, but all the evals show depth 8.
2. The evals are in general not even close to what I show for the same version at either depth 7 or 8.
3. The blunder 20.Qe4??; my Komodo 13.3 makes this blunder only at 1 or 2 ply; at depth 3 or above it sees the problem and avoids it.
4. How did you set a time limit for him in the GUI while still getting Komodo to play 7 (or 8) ply? What GUI permits this?
5. If you had MCTS on, fixed depth doesn't work right at all, but even then I can't get the blunder you got.
I don't know what you did, but apparently it wasn't playing better than depth 2! I think you just wasted $50.
p.s. I just noticed that Stockfish 11 makes the 20.Qe4?? blunder even at 8 ply (!!), did you somehow switch to Stockfish? It is much weaker than Komodo at single digit fixed depth (at one ply 33 elo weaker per my test, but hundreds of elo around 5 ply).

It could be because I used the Arena GUI, I noticed that the Time control was messed up, But Jorge agree to play another game and this game would be cancelled as if never happened. You are correct I checked the Depth and it is still set to 8 but the time control for some reason was messed up. Something is wrong with my Arena 3.5 GUI. Anyway I will be able to play this game with Jorge another time when I figure what GUI better than Arena 3.5 should I use.

I think you will have trouble finding a GUI that allows you to set the time limit for the human and a fixed depth for the engine without something going wrong. But there is an easy solution for Komodo. As long as you want depth 6,7,8,9, or 10, just add 13 to the depth and set the Skill level to that value instead of setting the depth. This will make it play at the proper depth, with a little randomness thrown in so you won't have repeat games. At these depths, the randomness hardly hurts the elo; I ran 12,000 games each of Skill 21 vs depth 8, Skill 20 vs depth 7, and Skill 19 vs depth 6, and the elo loss for the Skill levels was trivial except for depth 6 (1 elo for depth 8, 2 elo for depth 7, 15 elo for depth 6). So just use the Skill levels when playing Jorge. This doesn't work outside the given range.

[M ANSARI]

That's exactly why I wrote Fruit and Rybka. It's not about eng-eng matches it's about systematic tuning where one needs sound statistical criteria and possibility to play sufficient number of matches. That was not available before mid 2000's. And that's precisely why first Fruit and than Rybka was such a (quantum) leap.

Yes ... and this trend seems to be continuing with the success of SF NN! Would be interesting to see how much stronger at low depth SF is with an NN tuned evaluation.

Ansari should play a game against Stockfish or Komodo at time control 10 +5 sec increment at Depth 4 or 5 and let us know how you did ?

Lol ... I am sure I would get squashed like a fly. My days of playing computers and expecting to win are long gone. That was during the days where you could play the stonewall and have everything locked up on the queenside and all the computer forces would try and attack there and completely ignore the kingside. Then you just march your pawns and get a pretty simple win. You were still able to get away with it at fast time controls and a mobile platform ... but even that is not possible anymore as both hardware and software have gained incredible strength. With the new NN engines things are dramatically worse for a human even at low depth because the long term horizon effect is just not there as the NN engine will simply avoid these. Even allowing for one or two take back moves doesn't work anymore as the engine always seems to find a way to make dubious positions work somehow. Playing against an engine today is like trying to run against a race car ... it just doesn't serve any purpose anymore even at low depth. I mean of course you can remove one of the wheels of the race car and then claim you beat it ... but ... not really for me. Remember also that not all engines claim correct ply depth ... or at least not all ply depth is the same for all engines.

[Chessqueen]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?

Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.

You must have done something wrong. Several clues:
1. You say it was a depth 7 game, but all the evals show depth 8.
2. The evals are in general not even close to what I show for the same version at either depth 7 or 8.
3. The blunder 20.Qe4??; my Komodo 13.3 makes this blunder only at 1 or 2 ply; at depth 3 or above it sees the problem and avoids it.
4. How did you set a time limit for him in the GUI while still getting Komodo to play 7 (or 8) ply? What GUI permits this?
5. If you had MCTS on, fixed depth doesn't work right at all, but even then I can't get the blunder you got.
I don't know what you did, but apparently it wasn't playing better than depth 2! I think you just wasted $50.
p.s. I just noticed that Stockfish 11 makes the 20.Qe4?? blunder even at 8 ply (!!), did you somehow switch to Stockfish? It is much weaker than Komodo at single digit fixed depth (at one ply 33 elo weaker per my test, but hundreds of elo around 5 ply).

It could be because I used the Arena GUI, I noticed that the Time control was messed up, But Jorge agree to play another game and this game would be cancelled as if never happened. You are correct I checked the Depth and it is still set to 8 but the time control for some reason was messed up. Something is wrong with my Arena 3.5 GUI. Anyway I will be able to play this game with Jorge another time when I figure what GUI better than Arena 3.5 should I use.

I think you will have trouble finding a GUI that allows you to set the time limit for the human and a fixed depth for the engine without something going wrong. But there is an easy solution for Komodo. As long as you want depth 6,7,8,9, or 10, just add 13 to the depth and set the Skill level to that value instead of setting the depth. This will make it play at the proper depth, with a little randomness thrown in so you won't have repeat games. At these depths, the randomness hardly hurts the elo; I ran 12,000 games each of Skill 21 vs depth 8, Skill 20 vs depth 7, and Skill 19 vs depth 6, and the elo loss for the Skill levels was trivial except for depth 6 (1 elo for depth 8, 2 elo for depth 7, 15 elo for depth 6). So just use the Skill levels when playing Jorge. This doesn't work outside the given range.

Thanks, I figured it out under Shredder 8 GUI, by adding 13+7 = 20 Skill = 20 for Jorge Sammour and then selecting the Time control to 10 + 5 Sec increment, if he still wants to replay it it might happens this weekend, if he does not have time he will return the $50.00.

I found these games played in TCEC Stockfish Depth 1 Vs Chat a very old program written in Pascal with a command line interface, Chat could be ported to various machines such as DOS PCs, and even mainframes ==> https://live.chessbase.com/games/TCEC-S ... dova=False

Chat Chess ==> https://www.chessprogramming.org/Chat

[Chessqueen]

Unfortunately almost nobody want to learn chess 1 hour per day.

The people that I taught chess wanted to learn chess only 1 hour per week but I will be surprised if one hour per day is enough to beat stockfish depth 1 after a week.

You are correct Uri, it is NOT enough. Chess is harder than what people think, but there are gifted child, but even if they are 1 week is NOT enough. Talking from my own experience I started to take lesson from an online IM instructor and after 10 months of him guiding me and telling me to get a different chess book every months and testing me on what I should have learned from those books, and providing me with guided tactical positions to solves every week as I progress, different endgames books, strategies books and testing my comprehension of those books every other week, and giving different positions and asking me to take my time and answer what would be the best move to play and explain the reason why to him, anyway after 10 long months all that I have manage to accomplish is to draw versus Komodo 13.3 at Depth 4 in time control of 10 + 5 minutes, sometime I feel like I have wasted my money, but my trainer was very happy that I drew versus Komodo at depth 4. He simply put it this way you started training with me and you were a low 1300 to 1350 at your best and you have learned so much in 10 months which is what he expected me, since I am NOT a genius or gifted person like so many. All that I have to say is that there is so much to learn in chess, that the more you learn the more there is to keep on learning. I will be happy when I could beat Komodo 14 at Depth 5 Time control 10+5 sec increment and it might be harder to do because with every version of Komodo the harder it becomes
[/quote]

Larry what depth do you think that Jorge Sammour should play versus Komodo 13.3 at time control of 10 + 5 Sec increment, Depth 6 or Depth 7 ?
[/quote]



Well, since Alex Lenderman was a close match (maybe a slight underdog) vs. Komodo Skill 21 at 3' + 2", and Skill 21 is basically depth 8 with some randomization and limited book depth, he would probably be favored slightly against depth 7 with full opening book on one thread. Jorge is about a class below Lenderman in rating, but 5x the time limit should offset this, so I would bet on Jorge vs depth 7 but I would bet on Komodo using depth 8 (with a good opening book in each case).
[/quote]

Before I test it against Jorge Sammour I would like you to play at least 1 game at TC 10 + 5 sec increment with depth 6 and one with depth 7
[/quote]

I'm playing in the U.S. Senior tournament of state champions this weekend (online on chess.com) so I won't have time until at least Monday, but I would like to do this. But please keep in mind that although I might have been close to the same level as Jorge nearly twenty years ago, I'm a lot weaker than he is now, the difference might be more like 2 plies depth than 1.
[/quote]



You must have done something wrong. Several clues:
1. You say it was a depth 7 game, but all the evals show depth 8.
2. The evals are in general not even close to what I show for the same version at either depth 7 or 8.
3. The blunder 20.Qe4??; my Komodo 13.3 makes this blunder only at 1 or 2 ply; at depth 3 or above it sees the problem and avoids it.
4. How did you set a time limit for him in the GUI while still getting Komodo to play 7 (or 8) ply? What GUI permits this?
5. If you had MCTS on, fixed depth doesn't work right at all, but even then I can't get the blunder you got.
I don't know what you did, but apparently it wasn't playing better than depth 2! I think you just wasted $50.
p.s. I just noticed that Stockfish 11 makes the 20.Qe4?? blunder even at 8 ply (!!), did you somehow switch to Stockfish? It is much weaker than Komodo at single digit fixed depth (at one ply 33 elo weaker per my test, but hundreds of elo around 5 ply).
[/quote]


It could be because I used the Arena GUI, I noticed that the Time control was messed up, But Jorge agree to play another game and this game would be cancelled as if never happened. You are correct I checked the Depth and it is still set to 8 but the time control for some reason was messed up. Something is wrong with my Arena 3.5 GUI. Anyway I will be able to play this game with Jorge another time when I figure what GUI better than Arena 3.5 should I use.
[/quote]

I think you will have trouble finding a GUI that allows you to set the time limit for the human and a fixed depth for the engine without something going wrong. But there is an easy solution for Komodo. As long as you want depth 6,7,8,9, or 10, just add 13 to the depth and set the Skill level to that value instead of setting the depth. This will make it play at the proper depth, with a little randomness thrown in so you won't have repeat games. At these depths, the randomness hardly hurts the elo; I ran 12,000 games each of Skill 21 vs depth 8, Skill 20 vs depth 7, and Skill 19 vs depth 6, and the elo loss for the Skill levels was trivial except for depth 6 (1 elo for depth 8, 2 elo for depth 7, 15 elo for depth 6). So just use the Skill levels when playing Jorge. This doesn't work outside the given range.
[/quote]

Thanks, I figured it out under Shredder 8 GUI, by adding 13+7 = 20 Skill = 20 for Jorge Sammour and then selecting the Time control to 10 + 5 Sec increment, if he still wants to replay it it might happens this weekend, if he does not have time he will return the $50.00.

I found these games played in TCEC Stockfish Depth 1 Vs Chat a very old program written in Pascal with a command line interface, Chat could be ported to various machines such as DOS PCs, and even mainframes ==> https://live.chessbase.com/games/TCEC-S ... dova=False



[Event "WCCC 1986"]
[Site "Cologne, FRG"]
[Date "1986.06.14"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Chat"]
[Black "Enterprise"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nc3 Bb4 4.e3 O-O 5.Bd3 c5 6.Nf3 Nc6 7.Bd2 cxd4 8.exd4 d5
9.c5 Bxc3 10.Bxc3 Ne4 11.Qc2 f5 12.O-O Qc7 13.Kh1 Rf6 14.b4 Rh6 15.b5 Ne7
16.Bb4 Ng6 17.c6 Nf4 18.cxb7 Qxb7 19.g3 Nxd3 20.Qxd3 a6 21.a4 axb5 22.Qxb5
Qxb5 23.axb5 Rxa1 24.Rxa1 Nxf2+ 25.Kg2 Nd3 26.Bd2 Rf6 27.Rb1 e5 28.Nxe5 Nxe5
29.dxe5 Rf7 30.Rc1 Rf8 31.Rc7 d4 32.Re7 d3 33.b6 Ba6 34.Ra7 Bb5 35.Kf3 Bc6+
36.Kf4 Rb8 37.Ba5 Rd8 38.Bd2 g6 39.Ke3 Rc8 40.Bc3 Be4 41.Rc7 Rb8 42.e6 Kf8
43.Bg7+ Ke8 44.Bd4 h6 45.Rg7 d2 46.Rg8+ Ke7 47.Rg7+ Kxe6 48.Kxd2 Kd5 49.Bf2
g5 50.Rh7 f4 51.Rxh6 Rd8 52.Ke1 Bf3 53.Rh7 Re8+ 54.Kf1 Be2+ 55.Kg1 Ke6 56.Rg7
Kf6 57.Bd4+ Kf5 58.Kf2 Bd1 59.Rf7+ Ke6 60.Rc7 Kd6 61.Bc5+ Kd5 62.Be7 fxg3+
63.Kxg3 Ra8 64.b7 Ba4 65.Rc5+ Ke6 66.Rc7 Kd5 67.Rc5+ Ke6 68.Rc7 Kd5 1/2-1/2


Chat Chess, does anybody know the rating of Chat, or Enterprise which played back in 1986, probably we could determine or estimate Stockfish rating depth1 ? ==> https://www.chessprogramming.org/Chat

[Chessqueen]

1st Stockfish at depth 1 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 2 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 3 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 4 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 5 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =


We all know why Stockfish is soo strong, because it is the Program that reaches the highest depth withing a certain time control, but has anybody done a 100 match games between Komodo vs Stockfish with depth set to 22 or 24 ?

[Chessqueen]

1st Stockfish at depth 1 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 2 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 3 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 4 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 5 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =


We all know why Stockfish is soo strong, because it is the Program that reaches the highest depth withing a certain time control, but has anybody done a 100 match games between Komodo vs Stockfish with depth set to 22 or 24 ?

Larry should I use your latest Komodo version if it would make any difference against Jorge ?

[lkaufman]

1st Stockfish at depth 1 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 2 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 3 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 4 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =
1st Stockfish at depth 5 Please provide estimated rating = Komodo =


We all know why Stockfish is soo strong, because it is the Program that reaches the highest depth withing a certain time control, but has anybody done a 100 match games between Komodo vs Stockfish with depth set to 22 or 24 ?

On one thread, Stockfish generally wins matches at fixed depths like this, although it may depend on the precise version of each. On many threads, I think Komodo would win, because Stockfish seems to use the extra threads more for depth while Komodo goes more for quality, but again it may depend on the precise version and the number of threads.