Cursed win at TCEC

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6033
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:35 pm

Evert wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: [d]K5Q1/8/8/8/5bb1/6k1/8/8 w - - 0 1

this already should be tbs win in more than 50.

is SF able to deliver mate in blitz mode without tbs?
The position is a cursed win, so not against optimal defence. Against sub-optimal defence? Maybe, but who cares?
optimal defence = 50-moves rule on.

an even more optimal defence would be 20-moves rule on, but then there will be almost no checkmates.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 22327
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by hgm » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:38 pm

Joerg Oster wrote:Indeed!
But even that wouldn't be sufficient.
It would also be necessary to tell cutechess-cli to not obey the rules of chess and not adjudicate draws by the 50-move rule.
Actually the rules of Chess do not stipulate this as a mandatory draw, but just allows the players to claim one. So from the GUI point of view it is an adjudication. I WinBoard/XBoard you can specify the number of moves after which such an adjudication would be made, or switch it of altogether by specifying 0.

Of course there always is the risk that Polyglot would feel the need to claim a draw on behalf of the engine. But you could always use UCI2WB instead, which certainly would not do that.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6033
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:43 pm

hgm wrote:That is not the position you asked about, which was a mate in 31. It seems you are back to the TCEC position.

Of course Stockfish cannot win that,.with or without EGT (against good defense). Or anyone else,for that matter. Because it is a theoretical draw.
and from my experience, top engines very easily solve similar simple positions; if SF sees the shorter win in 30 moves, certainly it will also see the bit longer one in 60 or so moves, it just needs more time.

problem is, how to disable 50-moves in SF and the GUI?
certainly someone has experience.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 22327
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by hgm » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:45 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:optimal defence = 50-moves rule on.
Optimizing defense does not constitute picking the rules. It is true that what is optimal depends on the rules; delaying the mate by an early sacrifice that resets the ply counter so that the mate, even though delayed, falls within the 50-move limit would obviously be stupid if a 50-move rule is in effect, while it is the only concern when it is not.

But it is easy enough to play Stockfish against either a Gaviota(=DTM)-using opponent as well as a Syzygy(=DTZ) using opponent.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 22327
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by hgm » Fri Nov 25, 2016 12:51 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:problem is, how to disable 50-moves in SF and the GUI?
certainly someone has experience.
Well, as being said, it would require modification of Stockfish to play this Chess variant.

I would not recommend anyone to waste his time on that, though. We can just assume for the sake of argument that such a modified Stockfish easily finds a mate in 60. Like the modified version of Fairy-Max that I made easily finds the forced mate in 5 in this position:
[d]k7/8/1PK5/8/8/8/8/8 w
(Actually an unmodified version finds a mate in 3 here;for you to guess how to achieve that.) :lol:
And Sjeng finds an easy win for white in this position:
[d]7q/8/5k2/8/8/4K3/8/8 w
So what? By modifying/wrecking an engine you could make anything happen. Everything you said so far would still remain meaningless babble.

Lyudmil Tsvetkov
Posts: 6033
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:41 am

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by Lyudmil Tsvetkov » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:00 pm

whereagles wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: SF is able to deliver mate on its own in such positions, so why deprive it of a well-deserved win?
Because, as others mentioned, the engines played in the assumption that the 50-moves rule was in effect. If Houdini was aware that cursed wins would indeed be scored as wins, it might have chosen other moves that may have led to a draw (or not..). Since we'll never know that, an adjudication is the solutions. In fact, this is what adjudication in sports is for.

Note also that people have checked some posts ago that Houdini did in fact had other drawish moves. It did not play those because engine efficiency requires it to opt for a drawish move as soon it finds one. And of course, a drawish TB hit is the fastest way to do it, so other draw possibilities are automatically pruned.

As I mentioned in my last post, I agree that cursed wins should be scored as wins, but only in engine tournaments where all engines have access to tablebases that can disable the 50-moves rule (you can also make a pretty good case for that in correspondence matches).

This is not the case of TCEC, because it has dozens of entrant engines and not all comply to that requirement. TCEC is all about quick access to the best live chess there is: one-click universal access, LTC games, all of the top engines, live chat flaming.. (lol). It would be weird to have different rules depending on whether engines have "50-moves /OFF" tablebase switches or not, so I think Anton should just adjust cutechess to score cursed wins as draws and otherwise leave TCEC as it is.

As to human games, well 200 moves (as you mentioned in the other thread, which seems to be broken for me at the moment) is far too much, even in special positions. That would lead to the dominant player to keep on playing drawn positions for a long time, hoping that his opponent messes up (he risks nothing). In some mind sports this sort of futile play is considered unethical and is liable to disciplinary sanctions. I agree with that view because it does not contribute to the promotion of the sport.
current TCEC is automatically run, so no need to change anything, that would create even more problems. you even do not have a clue how many cursed wins have been pruned during search, by which engines, and what they would have picked instead.

for future TCEC, why not simply allow cursed wins to be scored as wins in tbs and adjudicated so by the GUI, engines that use tbs will deservedly convert their advantageous position, engines that do not use tbs will not suffer in any conceivable way? I think this is the rigth way to go ahead. And sooner or later, this will happen.

Problem is much more serious, and I am certain you know it: by applying the 50-moves rule, engines deliberately do not choose the best move. Why do that?

I see nothing messy about an extended rule, it could be applied in 10 minutes by Ronald in the tbs, in another 10 minute by different GUI authors, and in another 10 minutes by different engine authors. 30 minutes hard work will bring about much more interesting chess, and much more legitimate outcomes.

all you need is for some protocol to specify that an extended draw rule would apply strictly in the case of computer chess tournaments. the protocol could be written in another 20 minutes. Once the protocol comes into force, gui, engine and tbs authors will comply in no time at all.

Problem is, where should such a rule be specified?

As to human games and your sports analogy, quite the contrary, if there is a win, the stronger player has the rigth to play for it, that would be the prupose of the rule, and a tbs win is an achievable win, of course.

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 22327
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 9:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller
Contact:

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by hgm » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:05 pm

We could of course also allow captured pieces to be dropped back on the board, in future TCEC. That would strongly reduce the draw rate, and make for much more interesting games. :idea:

Or allow an Elephant and a Hawk to be gated onto the board in the opening. That would give much more exciting tactics.

User avatar
Evert
Posts: 2898
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2011 11:42 pm
Location: NL
Contact:

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by Evert » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:12 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
Evert wrote:
Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote: [d]K5Q1/8/8/8/5bb1/6k1/8/8 w - - 0 1

this already should be tbs win in more than 50.

is SF able to deliver mate in blitz mode without tbs?
The position is a cursed win, so not against optimal defence. Against sub-optimal defence? Maybe, but who cares?
optimal defence = 50-moves rule on.
Obviously.
an even more optimal defence would be 20-moves rule on, but then there will be almost no checkmates.
What 20-move rule? There is no such rule.

You want to play by a different rule set, that's fine. I like different rule sets myself. Just stop confusing the issue by pretending to talk about Orthodox Chess when you're talking about Tsvetkov's Chess instead.

Joerg Oster
Posts: 612
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 3:29 pm
Location: Germany

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by Joerg Oster » Fri Nov 25, 2016 1:14 pm

hgm wrote:
Joerg Oster wrote:Indeed!
But even that wouldn't be sufficient.
It would also be necessary to tell cutechess-cli to not obey the rules of chess and not adjudicate draws by the 50-move rule.
Actually the rules of Chess do not stipulate this as a mandatory draw, but just allows the players to claim one. So from the GUI point of view it is an adjudication. I WinBoard/XBoard you can specify the number of moves after which such an adjudication would be made, or switch it of altogether by specifying 0.

Of course there always is the risk that Polyglot would feel the need to claim a draw on behalf of the engine. But you could always use UCI2WB instead, which certainly would not do that.
Too much of a hassle.
I don't think I will waste more time on this. :D
Jörg Oster

whereagles
Posts: 484
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 11:03 am

Re: fortress_draw_rule

Post by whereagles » Fri Nov 25, 2016 3:14 pm

Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:1. for future TCEC, why not simply allow cursed wins to be scored as wins in tbs and adjudicated so by the GUI, engines that use tbs will deservedly convert their advantageous position, engines that do not use tbs will not suffer in any conceivable way? I think this is the rigth way to go ahead. And sooner or later, this will happen.

2. As to human games and your sports analogy, quite the contrary, if there is a win, the stronger player has the rigth to play for it, that would be the prupose of the rule, and a tbs win is an achievable win, of course.
1. Because engines without TBs will have the 50-moves rule plugged in and play accordingly. It's clear one either:

(a) Sticks to 50-moves for all forms of chess, or

(b) Segregates between 50-moves competitions and cursed wins competitions. Specialized engines and correspondence chess may be put into the cursed wins competitions.

I would go (b), personally. In this case segregation is necessary because mixing the two player groups would create an unfair advantage for some of the competitors.

2. He does have the right to play for a win. For 50-moves :) He will now know whether the position is a win or draw anyway, for he has no TBs brain implants (yet.. lol).

Post Reply