Can Komodo give knight odds in standard chess to a master?

[Guenther]

what do you mean fake?
overstepping the TC at move 15 with 1 min. for the entire game is not that bad, as this would mean I have spent some 4 secs. on average per move, which should not be very long thinking when you are playing SF at bullet.

I simply don't have time for longer games.

but the longer the TC, human chances only improve.

Actually it was during move 9 ;-)
If you don't have time for real reproducible games just post none...
It would be so simple to setup e.g. a 3+3 inc game.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

what do you mean fake?
overstepping the TC at move 15 with 1 min. for the entire game is not that bad, as this would mean I have spent some 4 secs. on average per move, which should not be very long thinking when you are playing SF at bullet.

I simply don't have time for longer games.

but the longer the TC, human chances only improve.

Actually it was during move 9
If you don't have time for real reproducible games just post none...
It would be so simple to setup e.g. a 3+3 inc game.

contempt does not help at all.

I am using more time and SF resists a bit more, but that is all.
below 2 games with SF at contempt=100, seems to be the highest, SF would not accept more.

[pgn][Event "Blitz 1m"]
[Site "Microsoft"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "?"]
[White "myself, owner"]
[Black "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Annotator "owner"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "2017.??.??"]
[TimeControl "60"]

{512MB, OWNER-PC} 1. e4 {0} e5 {1.20/19 3} 2. Nf3 {5} Nc6 {1.30/22 0} 3. Bc4 {3
} Bc5 {1.44/20 0} 4. O-O {4} Nf6 {1.18/21 4} 5. d3 {3} O-O {1.30/21 2} 6. Nc3 {
7} h6 {1.17/23 0} 7. a3 {4} a6 {1.10/20 1} 8. b4 {7} Ba7 {1.07/19 1} 9. Nd5 {14
} d6 {1.20/25 0} 10. h3 {15} Be6 {1.00/19 2} 11. Be3 {19} Bxe3 {1.05/20 3} 12.
fxe3 {18} Bxd5 {0.99/26 0} 13. Bxd5 {4} Qb6 {1.00/25 0} 14. Qd2 {16} a5 {1.12/
22 7} 15. c3 {13} Nxd5 {1.19/25 0} 16. exd5 {1} Ne7 {1.16/21 0} 17. c4 {0} axb4
{1.00/23 1} 18. axb4 {3} Nf5 {1.00/28 0} 19. Rxa8 {9} Rxa8 {0.57/17 1} 20. Re1
{8} f6 {1.00/25 0} 21. Kh2 {7} Ra3 {1.00/30 0} 22. e4 {26} Nd4 {1.00/38 0} 23.
Nxd4 {2} Qxd4 {1.00/36 1} 24. Re3 {5} h5 {0.80/20 2} 25. h4 {0} Ra1 {0.89/23 4}
26. Re1 {26} Rxe1 {1.00/26 1} 27. Qxe1 {1} Qxd3 {1.00/29 0} 28. c5 {13} dxc5 {
1.00/36 0} 29. bxc5 {1} f5 {1.00/27 0} 30. c6 {17} bxc6 {1.00/26 1} 31. dxc6 {1
} Qc4 {0.81/21 1} 32. exf5 {10} e4 {1.00/34 0} 33. Qa5 {105} e3 {1.00/33 1} 34.
Qd8+ {2} Kh7 {1.00/31 1} 35. Qg5 {18} Qxc6 {1.00/29 2} 36. Qxh5+ {7} Kg8 {1.00/
25 1} 37. f6 {47} Qxf6 {1.00/27 1} 38. Qe8+ {4} Kh7 {1.00/36 0} 39. Qxe3 {4}
Qxh4+ {1.00/39 1} 40. Qh3 {3} Qxh3+ {1.00/48 0} 41. Kxh3 {2} g6 {1.00/51 0} 42.
Kg4 {1} Kh6 {1.00/52 3} 1/2-1/2

[Event "Blitz 1m"]
[Site "Microsoft"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "?"]
[White "myself, owner"]
[Black "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Annotator "owner"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "114"]
[EventDate "2017.??.??"]
[TimeControl "60"]

{512MB, OWNER-PC} 1. d4 {0} d5 {1.14/21 3} 2. Nf3 {2} Bf5 {1.04/18 1} 3. c3 {3}
Nc6 {1.00/20 2} 4. Bf4 {3} a6 {1.01/20 3} 5. e3 {3} Nf6 {0.97/23 0} 6. Bd3 {5}
e6 {1.02/23 0} 7. O-O {4} Ne4 {1.00/22 3} 8. Ne5 {5} Nxe5 {0.94/20 2} 9. Bxe5 {
1} f6 {0.84/21 0} 10. Bg3 {7} h5 {0.96/20 1} 11. Bxe4 {0} Bxe4 {0.86/20 1} 12.
f3 {5} Bg6 {0.42/17 1} 13. h3 {7} Qb6 {0.64/20 1} 14. Qb3 {2} Qxb3 {0.73/22 0}
15. axb3 {2} Bd3 {0.75/22 1} 16. Re1 {5} g5 {0.64/23 2} 17. b4 {8} g4 {0.62/19
1} 18. hxg4 {2} hxg4 {0.66/21 1} 19. Nd2 {5} O-O-O {0.68/20 2} 20. Nb3 {6} gxf3
{0.64/21 1} 21. gxf3 {1} b6 {0.73/24 1} 22. Kf2 {3} Rd7 {0.68/24 0} 23. Rh1 {3}
Rdh7 {0.64/25 0} 24. Rxh7 {2} Rxh7 {0.73/26 0} 25. Kg2 {8} Rh5 {0.59/21 1} 26.
Rh1 {7} Rxh1 {0.34/22 1} 27. Kxh1 {1} Bh6 {0.37/27 0} 28. Bf4 {17} Bg7 {0.35/
31 0} 29. Kg2 {9} e5 {0.34/32 0} 30. Bg3 {11} Kd7 {0.43/33 0} 31. f4 {3} Bc2 {
0.18/23 1} 32. Nd2 {3} exd4 {0.07/26 0} 33. exd4 {4} a5 {0.16/32 0} 34. bxa5 {
11} bxa5 {0.16/38 0} 35. Kf2 {20} a4 {0.15/23 1} 36. Ke3 {6} Ke6 {0.05/23 1}
37. c4 {35} dxc4 {0.08/37 0} 38. Nxc4 {1} Bf8 {0.08/35 0} 39. Kd2 {11} Bg6 {0.
08/37 0} 40. Ne3 {11} Bb4+ {0.06/28 1} 41. Kc1 {17} Be4 {0.07/26 2} 42. d5+ {42
} Kf7 {-0.10/25 1} 43. f5 {4} Bc5 {-0.08/30 0} 44. Bf4 {6} Bd4 {-0.08/32 1} 45.
d6 {9} Ke8 {-0.08/25 1} 46. Nc2 {0} Bc5 {-0.08/42 2} 47. Ne3 {9} Kd7 {-0.08/44
0} 48. Ng4 {17} Bd4 {-0.08/36 1} 49. Be3 {16} Bxe3+ {-0.08/46 0} 50. Nxe3 {1}
Kxd6 {-0.08/45 3} 51. Ng4 {0} Bxf5 {-0.08/45 1} 52. Nxf6 {1} Ke5 {-0.08/45 0}
53. Nh5 {16} Bd3 {-0.08/31 4} 54. Kd2 {5} Bg6 {-0.03/32 0} 55. Ng3 {3} Kd4 {-0.
03/29 0} 56. Ne2+ {2} Kc4 {-0.08/36 0} 57. Nc3 {4} Kb4 {-0.08/33 1} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

SF seems to weak at this point, it should get a lot better, in order to be able to give me a whole pawn advantage.

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

now I am giving SF a pawn advantage, but it does not seem to work very well.

most games finish unfortunately for me, like this one:

[pgn][Event "Blitz 1m"]
[Site "Microsoft"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "?"]
[White "myself, owner"]
[Black "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT"]
[Result "0-1"]
[Annotator "owner"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/1PPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "58"]
[EventDate "2017.??.??"]
[TimeControl "60"]

{512MB, OWNER-PC} 1. d4 {0} Nf6 {-0.42/20 3} 2. Nf3 {3} e6 {-0.43/19 1} 3. Bg5
{3} d5 {-0.58/18 1} 4. e3 {4} c5 {-0.57/19 0} 5. c3 {8} Nc6 {-0.59/16 1} 6. Bd3
{3} c4 {-0.70/20 0} 7. Bc2 {2} Be7 {-0.81/21 0} 8. O-O {3} h6 {-0.87/21 0} 9.
Bxf6 {15} Bxf6 {-0.80/21 3} 10. e4 {3} O-O {-0.72/22 2} 11. e5 {2} Be7 {-1.13/
20 1} 12. Ne1 {10} a5 {-1.22/18 2} 13. f4 {3} b5 {-1.35/20 0} 14. Nd2 {30} Qb6
{-1.81/17 2} 15. Ndf3 {0} a4 {-1.92/18 1} 16. g4 {9} a3 {-1.22/23 0} 17. bxa3 {
3} Qa5 {-1.41/22 0} 18. Qd2 {15} b4 {-1.38/25 0} 19. g5 {77} hxg5 {-1.25/27 0}
20. Nxg5 {12} bxc3 {-1.50/22 3} 21. Qg2 {9} Bxg5 {-3.31/18 1} 22. Qxg5 {44}
Nxd4 {-3.65/17 1} 23. Rf3 {34} Nxf3+ {-5.20/19 1} 24. Nxf3 {1} Qb6+ {-5.96/21 0
} 25. Kh1 {10} Qf2 {-6.60/25 0} 26. Bh7+ {0} Kxh7 {-11.22/17 1} 27. Qh5+ {1}
Kg8 {-11.81/20 0} 28. Ng5 {3} Qc2 {-13.91/18 1} 29. Rg1 {11} Bb7 {-19.48/21 1}
0-1

[/pgn]

I guess I could perform a bit better, but with longer TC.

any guess how one could beat SF with a pawn less, or at least draw?

[Guenther]

Thanks, this is a typical example to show your TimeOdds approach.
Actually in the end you played at TimeOdds of 10:1 and surely also
with watching the eval of SF and other shortcomings - boring and of no relevance.
(We have never seen any game and any analysis, which had relevance and substance)

Code: Select all

#       W Move  W T     B Move  Eval    B T     AccWT   AccBT   TimeOdds
1.      e4      0       e5      1.20/19 3       0       3       -
2.      Nf3     5       Nc6     1.30/22 0       5       3       1,7:1
3.      Bc4     3       Bc5     1.44/20 0       8       3       2,7:1
4.      O-O     4       Nf6     1.18/21 4       12      7       1,7:1
5.      d3      3       O-O     1.30/21 2       15      9       1,7:1
6.      Nc3     7       h6      1.17/23 0       22      9       2,4:1
7.      a3      4       a6      1.10/20 1       26      10      2,6:1
8.      b4      7       Ba7     1.07/19 1       33      11      3,0:1
9.      Nd5     14      d6      1.20/25 0       47      11      4,3:1
10.     h3      15      Be6     1.00/19 2       62      13      4,8:1
11.     Be3     19      Bxe3    1.05/20 3       81      16      5,1:1
12.     fxe3    18      Bxd5    0.99/26 0       99      16      6,2:1
13.     Bxd5    4       Qb6     1.00/25 0       103     16      6,4:1
14.     Qd2     16      a5      1.12/22 7       119     23      5,2:1
15.     c3      13      Nxd5    1.19/25 0       132     23      5,7:1
16.     exd5    1       Ne7     1.16/21 0       133     23      5,8:1
17.     c4      0       axb4    1.00/23 1       133     24      5,5:1
18.     axb4    3       Nf5     1.00/28 0       136     24      5,7:1
19.     Rxa8    9       Rxa8    0.57/17 1       145     25      5,8:1
20.     Re1     8       f6      1.00/25 0       153     25      6,1:1
21.     Kh2     7       Ra3     1.00/30 0       160     25      6,4:1
22.     e4      26      Nd4     1.00/38 0       186     25      7,4:1
23.     Nxd4    2       Qxd4    1.00/36 1       188     26      7,2:1
24.     Re3     5       h5      0.80/20 2       193     28      6,9:1
25.     h4      0       Ra1     0.89/23 4       193     32      6,0:1
26.     Re1     26      Rxe1    1.00/26 1       219     33      6,6:1
27.     Qxe1    1       Qxd3    1.00/29 0       220     33      6,7:1
28.     c5      13      dxc5    1.00/36 0       233     33      7,1:1
29.     bxc5    1       f5      1.00/27 0       234     33      7,1:1
30.     c6      17      bxc6    1.00/26 1       251     34      7,4:1
31.     dxc6    1       Qc4     0.81/21 1       252     35      7,2:1
32.     exf5    10      e4      1.00/34 0       262     35      7,5:1
33.     Qa5     105     e3      1.00/33 1       367     36      10,2:1
34.     Qd8+    2       Kh7     1.00/31 1       369     37      10,0:1
35.     Qg5     18      Qxc6    1.00/29 2       387     39      9,9:1
36.     Qxh5+   7       Kg8     1.00/25 1       394     40      9,9:1
37.     f6      47      Qxf6    1.00/27 1       441     41      10,8:1
38.     Qe8+    4       Kh7     1.00/36 0       445     41      10,9:1
39.     Qxe3    4       Qxh4+   1.00/39 1       449     42      10,7:1
40.     Qh3     3       Qxh3+   1.00/48 0       452     42      10,8:1
41.     Kxh3    2       g6      1.00/51 0       454     42      10,8:1
42.     Kg4     1       Kh6     1.00/52 3       455     45      10,1:1

I am using more time and SF resists a bit more, but that is all.
below 2 games with SF at contempt=100, seems to be the highest, SF would not accept more.

[pgn][Event "Blitz 1m"]
[Site "Microsoft"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "?"]
[White "myself, owner"]
[Black "Stockfish 8 64 POPCNT"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Annotator "owner"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "84"]
[EventDate "2017.??.??"]
[TimeControl "60"]

{512MB, OWNER-PC} 1. e4 {0} e5 {1.20/19 3} 2. Nf3 {5} Nc6 {1.30/22 0} 3. Bc4 {3
} Bc5 {1.44/20 0} 4. O-O {4} Nf6 {1.18/21 4} 5. d3 {3} O-O {1.30/21 2} 6. Nc3 {
7} h6 {1.17/23 0} 7. a3 {4} a6 {1.10/20 1} 8. b4 {7} Ba7 {1.07/19 1} 9. Nd5 {14
} d6 {1.20/25 0} 10. h3 {15} Be6 {1.00/19 2} 11. Be3 {19} Bxe3 {1.05/20 3} 12.
fxe3 {18} Bxd5 {0.99/26 0} 13. Bxd5 {4} Qb6 {1.00/25 0} 14. Qd2 {16} a5 {1.12/
22 7} 15. c3 {13} Nxd5 {1.19/25 0} 16. exd5 {1} Ne7 {1.16/21 0} 17. c4 {0} axb4
{1.00/23 1} 18. axb4 {3} Nf5 {1.00/28 0} 19. Rxa8 {9} Rxa8 {0.57/17 1} 20. Re1
{8} f6 {1.00/25 0} 21. Kh2 {7} Ra3 {1.00/30 0} 22. e4 {26} Nd4 {1.00/38 0} 23.
Nxd4 {2} Qxd4 {1.00/36 1} 24. Re3 {5} h5 {0.80/20 2} 25. h4 {0} Ra1 {0.89/23 4}
26. Re1 {26} Rxe1 {1.00/26 1} 27. Qxe1 {1} Qxd3 {1.00/29 0} 28. c5 {13} dxc5 {
1.00/36 0} 29. bxc5 {1} f5 {1.00/27 0} 30. c6 {17} bxc6 {1.00/26 1} 31. dxc6 {1
} Qc4 {0.81/21 1} 32. exf5 {10} e4 {1.00/34 0} 33. Qa5 {105} e3 {1.00/33 1} 34.
Qd8+ {2} Kh7 {1.00/31 1} 35. Qg5 {18} Qxc6 {1.00/29 2} 36. Qxh5+ {7} Kg8 {1.00/
25 1} 37. f6 {47} Qxf6 {1.00/27 1} 38. Qe8+ {4} Kh7 {1.00/36 0} 39. Qxe3 {4}
Qxh4+ {1.00/39 1} 40. Qh3 {3} Qxh3+ {1.00/48 0} 41. Kxh3 {2} g6 {1.00/51 0} 42.
Kg4 {1} Kh6 {1.00/52 3} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

SF seems to weak at this point, it should get a lot better, in order to be able to give me a whole pawn advantage. :)

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

btw, it seems in this game I missed at least a draw:

[d]r1b2rk1/4bpp1/2n1p3/q2pP1N1/2pP1P2/P1p5/2BQ3P/R3NRK1 w - - 0 1

here I played Qg2, but it seems Qe3 instead, followed by Nef3 gives at least a draw in a very long variation.

if this is true, than it is quite possible to beat SF, contempt=100, with a pawn less, with careful play.

anyone able to confirm this on fast hardware?(this is a very interesting and deep position)

maybe it is time to think about humans giving odds to engines?

[Nordlandia]

Apparently, Lyudmil can play against god and give him a pawn of advantage.

Like Steinitz.

[Guenther]

So let's start a 3 pawn handicap for 2000 elo player :)

I did not really try yet, one has first get used to unusual patterns and setup a game which hides all info for the Human side.
But here is a game vs. a good and stable program which is over 2400+ in CCRL.
You can see the damage latest SF Asm can do to it! Of course we expect Humans to do relatively better.

TC 5+3
Hash 512
SF Asm 2 cores + all Syzygy 5 + contempt 100

Code: Select all

From CCRL complete list 40/4:
174  Abrok 5.0  2434  +10  -10  43.4%  +48.4  25.4%  4366  55.7%

[pgn][Event "RWBC"]
[Site "CAPPUCCINO"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "-"]
[White "asmFishW_2017-08-05_base (UCI2WB)"]
[Black "Abrok 5.0"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+3"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/P2PPPP1/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

{--------------
r n b q k b n r
p p p p p p p p
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
P . . P P P P .
R N B Q K B N R
white to play
--------------}
1. e4 {-2.74/24} d5 {+2.80/12 13} 2. exd5 {-2.56/21 6} Qxd5 {+2.76/12 13}
3. Nc3 {-2.38/21 2.2} Qd6 {+2.68/12 22} 4. d4 {-2.32/22 5} Nf6
{+2.62/11 12} 5. Nf3 {-2.23/22 8} a6 {+2.68/11 11} 6. Bd3 {-2.08/19 4} Nc6
{+2.68/11 11} 7. Rb1 {-2.23/23 16} b5 {+2.50/11 11} 8. a4 {-1.89/20 6} b4
{+2.50/10 8} 9. Ne4 {-1.73/19 5} Nxe4 {+2.48/11 9} 10. Bxe4 {-1.00/21 5}
Bb7 {+2.28/11 7} 11. Qc2 {-1.15/26 18} Rd8 {+1.80/11 11} 12. Be3
{-1.00/24 1.4} Na5 {+1.80/11 7} 13. Rh5 {-1.00/27 10} b3 {+2.46/11 10} 14.
Qd3 {-1.00/29 12} Bxe4 {+2.18/12 10} 15. Qxe4 {-1.00/29 1.9} Qb6
{+1.46/12 13} 16. Bd2 {-1.00/30 6} Qc6 {+1.40/13 17} 17. Qxc6+
{-1.00/25 10} Nxc6 {+1.72/13 8} 18. Rc5 {-0.87/26 6} Nxd4 {+1.32/12 8} 19.
Nxd4 {-0.51/27 20} Rxd4 {+1.24/13 10} 20. Rxb3 {-0.64/24 1.5} f6
{+1.24/13 10} 21. a5 {-0.77/26 14} Rg4 {+1.04/13 10} 22. Kf1 {-0.24/25 5}
Rd4 {+0.98/14 9} 23. Bc3 {-0.08/27 6} Rd1+ {+0.98/13 7} 24. Ke2
{-0.66/26 16} Rd7 {+0.90/13 6} 25. Rc6 {-0.08/29 7} e5 {+1.00/14 9} 26.
Rb8+ {-0.08/29 3} Rd8 {+0.74/15 8} 27. Rxd8+ {-0.08/32 8} Kxd8 {+0.68/16 8}
28. Rxa6 {-0.16/34 7} Kc8 {+0.38/16 9} 29. Ra8+ {-0.08/30 6} Kb7
{+0.34/16 8} 30. Rd8 {-0.08/35 42} g5 {+0.52/14 7} 31. g4 {+0.00/31 4} Kc6
{+0.90/15 7} 32. a6 {+0.08/33 5} Kb6 {+1.08/14 6} 33. Ra8 {+0.08/35 7} c5
{+0.90/15 14} 34. Kd3 {+0.50/30 5} h6 {+0.08/12 7} 35. Kc4 {+2.81/27 5} Rg8
{-1.28/13 9} 36. Be1 {+3.36/28 4} Rh8 {-1.14/14 6} 37. Bd2 {+3.57/26 4} f5
{-1.60/13 5} 38. gxf5 {+8.15/24 4} g4 {-2.10/11 4} 39. Bc3 {+9.08/23 4} Bg7
{-2.32/12 11} 40. Ba5+ {+18.99/23 5} Kxa5 {-5.46/14 8} 41. Rxh8
{+1000.15/23 4} Kxa6 {-6.02/13 3} 42. Rg8 {+1000.12/33 7} Bf6 {-7.24/14 6}
43. Rg6 {+1000.11/35 1.8} Kb7 {-7.58/13 5} 44. Rxf6 {+1000.10/40 5} Kc7
{-8.06/12 4} 45. Re6 {+1000.09/39 5} Kd7 {-9.66/11 4} 46. Kd5
{+1000.07/45 5} g3 {-11.40/11 7}
{Abrok resigns} 1-0[/pgn]



[Event "RWBC"]
[Site "CAPPUCCINO"]
[Date "2017.08.06"]
[Round "-"]
[White "asmFishW_2017-08-05_base (UCI2WB)"]
[Black "Abrok 5.0"]
[Result "1-0"]
[TimeControl "300+3"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/P2PPPP1/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]

{--------------
r n b q k b n r
p p p p p p p p
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . .
P . . P P P P .
R N B Q K B N R
white to play
--------------}
1. e4 {-2.74/24} d5 {+2.80/12 13} 2. exd5 {-2.56/21 6} Qxd5 {+2.76/12 13}
3. Nc3 {-2.38/21 2.2} Qd6 {+2.68/12 22} 4. d4 {-2.32/22 5} Nf6
{+2.62/11 12} 5. Nf3 {-2.23/22 8} a6 {+2.68/11 11} 6. Bd3 {-2.08/19 4} Nc6
{+2.68/11 11} 7. Rb1 {-2.23/23 16} b5 {+2.50/11 11} 8. a4 {-1.89/20 6} b4
{+2.50/10 8} 9. Ne4 {-1.73/19 5} Nxe4 {+2.48/11 9} 10. Bxe4 {-1.00/21 5}
Bb7 {+2.28/11 7} 11. Qc2 {-1.15/26 18} Rd8 {+1.80/11 11} 12. Be3
{-1.00/24 1.4} Na5 {+1.80/11 7} 13. Rh5 {-1.00/27 10} b3 {+2.46/11 10} 14.
Qd3 {-1.00/29 12} Bxe4 {+2.18/12 10} 15. Qxe4 {-1.00/29 1.9} Qb6
{+1.46/12 13} 16. Bd2 {-1.00/30 6} Qc6 {+1.40/13 17} 17. Qxc6+
{-1.00/25 10} Nxc6 {+1.72/13 8} 18. Rc5 {-0.87/26 6} Nxd4 {+1.32/12 8} 19.
Nxd4 {-0.51/27 20} Rxd4 {+1.24/13 10} 20. Rxb3 {-0.64/24 1.5} f6
{+1.24/13 10} 21. a5 {-0.77/26 14} Rg4 {+1.04/13 10} 22. Kf1 {-0.24/25 5}
Rd4 {+0.98/14 9} 23. Bc3 {-0.08/27 6} Rd1+ {+0.98/13 7} 24. Ke2
{-0.66/26 16} Rd7 {+0.90/13 6} 25. Rc6 {-0.08/29 7} e5 {+1.00/14 9} 26.
Rb8+ {-0.08/29 3} Rd8 {+0.74/15 8} 27. Rxd8+ {-0.08/32 8} Kxd8 {+0.68/16 8}
28. Rxa6 {-0.16/34 7} Kc8 {+0.38/16 9} 29. Ra8+ {-0.08/30 6} Kb7
{+0.34/16 8} 30. Rd8 {-0.08/35 42} g5 {+0.52/14 7} 31. g4 {+0.00/31 4} Kc6
{+0.90/15 7} 32. a6 {+0.08/33 5} Kb6 {+1.08/14 6} 33. Ra8 {+0.08/35 7} c5
{+0.90/15 14} 34. Kd3 {+0.50/30 5} h6 {+0.08/12 7} 35. Kc4 {+2.81/27 5} Rg8
{-1.28/13 9} 36. Be1 {+3.36/28 4} Rh8 {-1.14/14 6} 37. Bd2 {+3.57/26 4} f5
{-1.60/13 5} 38. gxf5 {+8.15/24 4} g4 {-2.10/11 4} 39. Bc3 {+9.08/23 4} Bg7
{-2.32/12 11} 40. Ba5+ {+18.99/23 5} Kxa5 {-5.46/14 8} 41. Rxh8
{+1000.15/23 4} Kxa6 {-6.02/13 3} 42. Rg8 {+1000.12/33 7} Bf6 {-7.24/14 6}
43. Rg6 {+1000.11/35 1.8} Kb7 {-7.58/13 5} 44. Rxf6 {+1000.10/40 5} Kc7
{-8.06/12 4} 45. Re6 {+1000.09/39 5} Kd7 {-9.66/11 4} 46. Kd5
{+1000.07/45 5} g3 {-11.40/11 7}
{Abrok resigns} 1-0

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Thanks, this is a typical example to show your TimeOdds approach.
Actually in the end you played at TimeOdds of 10:1 and surely also
with watching the eval of SF and other shortcomings - boring and of no relevance.
(We have never seen any game and any analysis, which had relevance and substance)

Code: Select all

#       W Move  W T     B Move  Eval    B T     AccWT   AccBT   TimeOdds
1.      e4      0       e5      1.20/19 3       0       3       -
2.      Nf3     5       Nc6     1.30/22 0       5       3       1,7:1
3.      Bc4     3       Bc5     1.44/20 0       8       3       2,7:1
4.      O-O     4       Nf6     1.18/21 4       12      7       1,7:1
5.      d3      3       O-O     1.30/21 2       15      9       1,7:1
6.      Nc3     7       h6      1.17/23 0       22      9       2,4:1
7.      a3      4       a6      1.10/20 1       26      10      2,6:1
8.      b4      7       Ba7     1.07/19 1       33      11      3,0:1
9.      Nd5     14      d6      1.20/25 0       47      11      4,3:1
10.     h3      15      Be6     1.00/19 2       62      13      4,8:1
11.     Be3     19      Bxe3    1.05/20 3       81      16      5,1:1
12.     fxe3    18      Bxd5    0.99/26 0       99      16      6,2:1
13.     Bxd5    4       Qb6     1.00/25 0       103     16      6,4:1
14.     Qd2     16      a5      1.12/22 7       119     23      5,2:1
15.     c3      13      Nxd5    1.19/25 0       132     23      5,7:1
16.     exd5    1       Ne7     1.16/21 0       133     23      5,8:1
17.     c4      0       axb4    1.00/23 1       133     24      5,5:1
18.     axb4    3       Nf5     1.00/28 0       136     24      5,7:1
19.     Rxa8    9       Rxa8    0.57/17 1       145     25      5,8:1
20.     Re1     8       f6      1.00/25 0       153     25      6,1:1
21.     Kh2     7       Ra3     1.00/30 0       160     25      6,4:1
22.     e4      26      Nd4     1.00/38 0       186     25      7,4:1
23.     Nxd4    2       Qxd4    1.00/36 1       188     26      7,2:1
24.     Re3     5       h5      0.80/20 2       193     28      6,9:1
25.     h4      0       Ra1     0.89/23 4       193     32      6,0:1
26.     Re1     26      Rxe1    1.00/26 1       219     33      6,6:1
27.     Qxe1    1       Qxd3    1.00/29 0       220     33      6,7:1
28.     c5      13      dxc5    1.00/36 0       233     33      7,1:1
29.     bxc5    1       f5      1.00/27 0       234     33      7,1:1
30.     c6      17      bxc6    1.00/26 1       251     34      7,4:1
31.     dxc6    1       Qc4     0.81/21 1       252     35      7,2:1
32.     exf5    10      e4      1.00/34 0       262     35      7,5:1
33.     Qa5     105     e3      1.00/33 1       367     36      10,2:1
34.     Qd8+    2       Kh7     1.00/31 1       369     37      10,0:1
35.     Qg5     18      Qxc6    1.00/29 2       387     39      9,9:1
36.     Qxh5+   7       Kg8     1.00/25 1       394     40      9,9:1
37.     f6      47      Qxf6    1.00/27 1       441     41      10,8:1
38.     Qe8+    4       Kh7     1.00/36 0       445     41      10,9:1
39.     Qxe3    4       Qxh4+   1.00/39 1       449     42      10,7:1
40.     Qh3     3       Qxh3+   1.00/48 0       452     42      10,8:1
41.     Kxh3    2       g6      1.00/51 0       454     42      10,8:1
42.     Kg4     1       Kh6     1.00/52 3       455     45      10,1:1

so, 5 or 6 to 1 time odds on average, meaning, if SF played the entire game for 1 min., I have used 5 min. for it, does not seem to be very much to be able to draw SF, does it?

you think 5 to 10 sec. is a lot of thinking time against an opponent like SF?

it is impossible to play current top engines at bullet and no time odds, so I don't know what are you resenting.

I am much more comfortable with 10 min. on the clock, and SF having 10, engines basically gain nothing from more time, as they have no knowledge, while humans certainly will avoid a lot of tactical mistakes with more time.

and of course, having a whole hour, with SF having the same amount, is much preferable to me than me having 5 min. and SF 1 min.

due to lack of time, I have to accomodate.

you say I never contributed anything, and all my posted positions have alwasy been boring.

quite certain?

well, here is one, just from the last game:

[d]r1b2rk1/4bpp1/2n1p3/q2pP1N1/2pP1P2/P1p5/2BQ3P/R3NRK1 w - - 0 1

here, Qf2 seems to at least draw for white, but maybe also giving good winning chances.

please, tell me, why you think this position is boring?

[Lyudmil Tsvetkov]

Apparently, Lyudmil can play against god and give him a pawn of advantage.

Like Steinitz.

until you give SF 2 pawns advantage and being able to win, one can not speak of a masterful play.

[Guenther]

you say I never contributed anything, and all my posted positions have alwasy been boring.

I said 'with relevance and substance'. I mean of course, scientifically and reproducible... this is the most important about what 'we' do.
(boring is your attitude...)

But this leads to nothing as expected. You are not able to do sth. under such conditions and you don't even know what it means.