Soccer-like chess

[cdani]

I think that when at around move 20 both engines report 0.00 draw score, there is nothing more to do.

For my experience with Andscacs, it's 0.00 means I don't know how to improve, i.e. lack of knowledge. I'm not sure if this is applicable to Stockfish and Komodo.

[duncan]

I think that when at around move 20 both engines report 0.00 draw score, there is nothing more to do.

in how many years do you estimate this will happen ?

[lkaufman]

The 'unbalancing' of the openings was obviously done very poorly, and a complete bust. They were not anywhere near unbalanced enough. Pawn odds is known to produce around 20% advantage (i.e. a 30% score for the handicapped side), and even this falls short of the mark, as a 50-50 mix of draws and wins would cause a 75% score.

So it was predictable the out-of book advantage would have to be a Pawn and then something, and the chosen lines only provided a fraction of that.

I'm not sure where you got your above data, but a 70% score for a healthy extra pawn for Komodo at the start sounds pretty low, assuming you are averaging White and Black. Keep in mind that in the initial position any pawn removed other than the "f" pawn automatically gives some compensation in mobility. A score of about 0.7 to 0.75 in the opening for Komodo seems to be about the score which produces equal White wins and draws, which is roughly what an extra pawn in the opening would show if all else is equal. But yes, the positions were not unbalanced enough to avoid excessive draws.

[Leto]

Is it possible to come up with openings that are unbalanced enough to significantly reduce the draw rate and yet allow for the participants to create winning chances rather than just winning a won game? Is there a sweetspot into how unbalanced it can get without making it unfair?

[hgm]

I'm not sure where you got your above data, but a 70% score for a healthy extra pawn for Komodo at the start sounds pretty low, assuming you are averaging White and Black.

I remember having seen a systemetic investigation of this on Rybka forum, many years ago, when it still was a serious forum. Someone had tested (using Rybka self-play) the effect of deleting the various Pawns in the opening position, and reported scores varying from 68-73%, the highest score (as expected) for the f-Pawn. I don't remember if this averaged over the white/black advantage (which should be 3-4%).

My own testing usually gets even lower results, with Fairy-Max self-play deleting the f-Pawn usually results in 65-68% scores. (That is averaged over black and white.) I always assumed the difference with the Rybka result was because of the poor Pawn handling by Fairy-Max. Higher quality play through using slower TC does not seem to change this, in the range 40/1min to 40/10min. Using Joker instead of Fairy-Max, which is supposed to add some 400 Elo, did also produce a result near 68%.

[lkaufman]

I'm not sure where you got your above data, but a 70% score for a healthy extra pawn for Komodo at the start sounds pretty low, assuming you are averaging White and Black.

I remember having seen a systemetic investigation of this on Rybka forum, many years ago, when it still was a serious forum. Someone had tested (using Rybka self-play) the effect of deleting the various Pawns in the opening position, and reported scores varying from 68-73%, the highest score (as expected) for the f-Pawn. I don't remember if this averaged over the white/black advantage (which should be 3-4%).

My own testing usually gets even lower results, with Fairy-Max self-play deleting the f-Pawn usually results in 65-68% scores. (That is averaged over black and white.) I always assumed the difference with the Rybka result was because of the poor Pawn handling by Fairy-Max. Higher quality play through using slower TC does not seem to change this, in the range 40/1min to 40/10min. Using Joker instead of Fairy-Max, which is supposed to add some 400 Elo, did also produce a result near 68%.

For the "f" pawn alternating colors I think the results are in the upper 70s for Komodo, although I don't have the exact data handy right now.

[Laskos]

I'm not sure where you got your above data, but a 70% score for a healthy extra pawn for Komodo at the start sounds pretty low, assuming you are averaging White and Black.

I remember having seen a systemetic investigation of this on Rybka forum, many years ago, when it still was a serious forum. Someone had tested (using Rybka self-play) the effect of deleting the various Pawns in the opening position, and reported scores varying from 68-73%, the highest score (as expected) for the f-Pawn. I don't remember if this averaged over the white/black advantage (which should be 3-4%).

My own testing usually gets even lower results, with Fairy-Max self-play deleting the f-Pawn usually results in 65-68% scores. (That is averaged over black and white.) I always assumed the difference with the Rybka result was because of the poor Pawn handling by Fairy-Max. Higher quality play through using slower TC does not seem to change this, in the range 40/1min to 40/10min. Using Joker instead of Fairy-Max, which is supposed to add some 400 Elo, did also produce a result near 68%.

For the "f" pawn alternating colors I think the results are in the upper 70s for Komodo, although I don't have the exact data handy right now.

IIRC for f pawn maybe above 80% averaging White and Black. Also, excluding a and h pawns, e and d pawns are pretty "average" for pawn handicap, and the expected averaged White-Black performance is just a little below 80%. Depends slowly on time control.

[carldaman]

I think that when at around move 20 both engines report 0.00 draw score, there is nothing more to do.

For my experience with Andscacs, it's 0.00 means I don't know how to improve, i.e. lack of knowledge. I'm not sure if this is applicable to Stockfish and Komodo.

In other words, the position is unclear, ∞ <infinity symbol>, and 0.00 is not automatically equal.
EDIT: Stockfish has similar behavior.

CL

[cdani]

I think that when at around move 20 both engines report 0.00 draw score, there is nothing more to do.

For my experience with Andscacs, it's 0.00 means I don't know how to improve, i.e. lack of knowledge. I'm not sure if this is applicable to Stockfish and Komodo.

In other words, the position is unclear, ∞ <infinity symbol>, and 0.00 is not automatically equal.
EDIT: Stockfish has similar behavior.

CL

Andscacs has the "advantage" to have better engines that explains it that 0.00 was not equal

[Ferdy]

Is it possible to come up with openings that are unbalanced enough to significantly reduce the draw rate and yet allow for the participants to create winning chances rather than just winning a won game? Is there a sweetspot into how unbalanced it can get without making it unfair?

Unbalanced opening sure and there is nothing wrong with draws it is only a 1/2-1/2 result, what mattered is how the engines played the game, those deep maneuvers that is very difficult to understand, you can only understand it after couple of moves in the game. There are draw results that are beautiful and thrilling that are better than a game with one side won. As a player I like to see how an engine solves a problematic position in the eyes of a human player. How to handle a pawn weakness like backward pawns and isolated pawns? How to counter a knight outpost?

I think the challenge to create opening is to produce an interesting game. Not all won games are interesting.