87% of the poll voted that SF will win Tcec Sufi 19.

[nabildanial]

People talked too soon in this thread. SF is up by +6 points now on TCEC.

[peter]

People talked too soon in this thread. SF is up by +6 points now on TCEC.

After 81 games:

Wins = 14
Draws = 59
Losses = 8
Av.Op. Elo = 3500

Result : 43.5/81 (+14,=59,-8)
Perf. : 53.7 %
Margins :
68 % : (+ 2.9,- 2.8 %) -> [ 50.9, 56.6 %]
95 % : (+ 5.7,- 5.6 %) -> [ 48.1, 59.4 %]
99.7 % : (+ 8.6,- 8.4 %) -> [ 45.3, 62.3 %]

Elo : 3526
Margins :
68 % : (+ 20,- 20) -> [3506,3546]
95 % : (+ 40,- 39) -> [3487,3566]
99.7 % : (+ 62,- 59) -> [3467,3587]

[Laskos]

People talked too soon in this thread. SF is up by +6 points now on TCEC.

After 81 games:

Wins = 14
Draws = 59
Losses = 8
Av.Op. Elo = 3500

Result : 43.5/81 (+14,=59,-8)
Perf. : 53.7 %
Margins :
68 % : (+ 2.9,- 2.8 %) -> [ 50.9, 56.6 %]
95 % : (+ 5.7,- 5.6 %) -> [ 48.1, 59.4 %]
99.7 % : (+ 8.6,- 8.4 %) -> [ 45.3, 62.3 %]

Elo : 3526
Margins :
68 % : (+ 20,- 20) -> [3506,3546]
95 % : (+ 40,- 39) -> [3487,3566]
99.7 % : (+ 62,- 59) -> [3467,3587]

7:1 pairwise wins for Stockfish with 33 drawn pairs of games. A pretty decisive result.

[Daniel Shawul]

It has been clear for sometime now that the unbalanced book is very unfair to Lc0.
TCEC does it for the sake of entertainment, but drawing any conclusions from it doesn't make any sense.
This SuFi and last one have been all about who can convert better given a position with a +1 advantage.
If every season is going to be like this, I guess there is no point watching TCEC SuFi.

[Damir]

Why is it unfair? Lc0 can just try and win some games instead of losing...

[jorose]

It has been clear for sometime now that the unbalanced book is very unfair to Lc0.
TCEC does it for the sake of entertainment, but drawing any conclusions from it doesn't make any sense.
This SuFi and last one have been all about who can convert better given a position with a +1 advantage.
If every season is going to be like this, I guess there is no point watching TCEC SuFi.

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

I just took a look at the first 10 openings (20 games) and I don't think they are particularly unbalanced. In fact, I play several of those openings myself. The only ones I find somewhat odd are the French with Ng8 and KGA with Nc3.

Most of the lines are theoretically very well established and see a decent amount of play.I'm not sure where this notion comes from that TCEC has unbalanced openings this season in particular.

I also don't know what such fans want to see, would they prefer even less decisive games?

[nabildanial]

It has been clear for sometime now that the unbalanced book is very unfair to Lc0.
TCEC does it for the sake of entertainment, but drawing any conclusions from it doesn't make any sense.

It's only unfair when Lc0 is losing. I can't see why it's unfair when both engines are forced to play the same opening both sides.

This SuFi and last one have been all about who can convert better given a position with a +1 advantage.

It has been the case since forever, it's not only for these past 2 seasons. I've heard the same exact argument from the losing side, whether it's SF, Komodo, Leela or Houdini fans. Same ol' story.

[Daniel Shawul]

It has been clear for sometime now that the unbalanced book is very unfair to Lc0.
TCEC does it for the sake of entertainment, but drawing any conclusions from it doesn't make any sense.
This SuFi and last one have been all about who can convert better given a position with a +1 advantage.
If every season is going to be like this, I guess there is no point watching TCEC SuFi.

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

I just took a look at the first 10 openings (20 games) and I don't think they are particularly unbalanced. In fact, I play several of those openings myself. The only ones I find somewhat odd are the French with Ng8 and KGA with Nc3.

Most of the lines are theoretically very well established and see a decent amount of play.I'm not sure where this notion comes from that TCEC has unbalanced openings this season in particular.

I also don't know what such fans want to see, would they prefer even less decisive games?

I am surprized you need clarification for this but here it goes.
These are scores of stockfish right out of book for the second half of the match starting from game 52

52 - +1.31
54 - +1.06
56 - +1.19
58 - +0.80
60 - +1.14
62 - +1.17
64 - +1.17
66 - +1.12
68 - +1.20
70 - +0.80
72 - -0.93
74 - +0.70
76 - +0.66
78 - +1.38
80 - +1.05
82 - +0.83

SF may well be superior to Lc0 but this unbalanced openings prove nothing.
Even SF without NNUE was able to get +7 over leela last season entirely due to the book.

[mwyoung]

It has been clear for sometime now that the unbalanced book is very unfair to Lc0.
TCEC does it for the sake of entertainment, but drawing any conclusions from it doesn't make any sense.
This SuFi and last one have been all about who can convert better given a position with a +1 advantage.
If every season is going to be like this, I guess there is no point watching TCEC SuFi.

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

I just took a look at the first 10 openings (20 games) and I don't think they are particularly unbalanced. In fact, I play several of those openings myself. The only ones I find somewhat odd are the French with Ng8 and KGA with Nc3.

Most of the lines are theoretically very well established and see a decent amount of play.I'm not sure where this notion comes from that TCEC has unbalanced openings this season in particular.

I also don't know what such fans want to see, would they prefer even less decisive games?

"I'm not sure where this notion comes from that TCEC has unbalanced openings this season in particular."

This comes from TCEC itself.

And why is this unfair, well because Lc0 is a pure NN engine, and learned the game from zero. In a losing position Lc0 only understands it is lost and does not care, and does not understand the concept of resistance. In a TCEC format this is not unfair, meaning a tester would not use such bias openings. But TCEC are not testers. TCEC is for entertainment, and TCEC to their credit said this is the reason for using bias openings.

From TCEC ---- "However, if very strong, closely matched programs are playing at long time controls with no bias that invites a draw-rate approaching 90%. To combat this, we introduce bias in League 1 and to an even greater degree in Premier League and the Superfinal. In the latter two, you will see some openings where one color has no realistic winning chances and the game is all about successfully holding a draw from an almost desperate position."

From TCEC----"In League 1 Nelson is in his comfort zone when opening evaluations in traditional chess engines (i.e. not neural nets) are between +/-0.40 and +/-0.65. In Premier League, a score of +/-0.50 to +/-0.80 is more common. Sometimes he will deviate from these guidelines to the upside or downside to satisfying opening variety goals."

From TCEC----"In each season’s Superfinal Jeroen has a free hand to do whatever he thinks will result in an interesting and varied contest. Sometimes his book-exit evaluations will exceed +/-1.00; sometimes he will offer speculative gambits. His goal is to keep the draw-rate in the 65-80% range each season without a surfeit of one-sided openings."

From TCEC ---- "Note that both Nelson and Jeroen freely acknowledge that few traditional and neural net engines would find themselves in most TCEC opening positions of their own accord. This is deliberate. The whole point is to force engines to play unexpected positions and demonstrate their strength in all kinds of game situations. This is especially true for neural nets, which in training tend to emphasize favorite lines and neglect what they deem to be inferior ones."

From TCEC----"Plus, it is more entertaining!"

[Tord]

It has been the case since forever, it's not only for these past 2 seasons. I've heard the same exact argument from the losing side, whether it's SF, Komodo, Leela or Houdini fans. Same ol' story.

It is true, though. It's a competition that tries to determine which engine is best at defending nearly lost positions on hardware you can't afford. Evidently, it's a form of entertainment many people enjoy, but it's not chess as it's usually played, and it's doubtful that any interesting conclusions can be made from the match results.