Comparing top players and Niemann

[Ferdy]

In the case between magnus and hans (highlighted in yellow), there is a high number of pos which is 30. pos is the number of positions that are not yet winning/losing. That means there is a long battle in this game when the position is not yet winning for one side, hans got 83.3% match from the top 1 move of Stockfish 15. Opening moves from 1 to 11 are not included. When the position is already winning according to the engine [300, 32000], hans got 66.7% top 1 move match from the engine. In 6.7% or 1 of 15 wpos as in indicated by wfail%, hans failed to maintain a winning position. I will show later how magnus performs on this game.

Magnus - hans comparison.



Magnus blundered from a bad position b6 and b7, and played bad moves from dubious position with m5.

[Ferdy]

Top players so far who played like an engine. No blunder, no mistakes, no dubious moves, no equal moves from good position and a high top 1 engine move choice match. The players under the name column won the game.

The table is sorted by t1% and wt1%.

[chessica]

from here: https://www.uschesschamps.com/2022-us-c ... gs-results

nothing new under the sun.

Ranking after round 11

Rank Name Score M/F Rating TPR W-We 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1 GM Caruana, Fabiano 7.5 M 2763 2785 +0.40 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ 1 1 ½ ½ ½ ½
2 GM Robson, Ray 7.0 M 2690 2780 +1.34 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 1 1 ½ ½ ½
3 GM Dominguez Perez, Leinier 6.5 M 2747 2725 -0.27 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ 1
4 GM Sevian, Samuel 6.5 M 2684 2724 +0.66 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1
5 GM Shankland, Sam 6.0 M 2712 2689 -0.35 ½ ½ ½ 0 1 ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½
6 GM Xiong, Jeffery 6.0 M 2690 2698 +0.09 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ 1 ½ ½ ½
7 GM Liang, Awonder 6.0 M 2608 2713 +1.52 ½ 0 1 ½ 1 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½ ½
8 GM So, Wesley 5.5 M 2774 2674 -1.48 ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 1
9 GM Niemann, Hans Moke 5.5 M 2699 2674 -0.35 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ 0 0 ½ ½ 1 1
10 GM Swiercz, Dariusz 5.5 M 2652 2689 +0.56 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ 1 1 ½ ½ ½ 0
11 GM Aronian, Levon 4.5 M 2755 2604 -2.27 ½ ½ ½ ½ 0 0 ½ ½ ½ ½ ½
12 GM Lenderman, Aleksandr 4.5 M 2535 2623 +1.21 ½ ½ 0 1 ½ ½ 0 ½ ½ ½ 0
13 GM Yoo, Christopher Woojin 4.0 M 2563 2580 +0.21 0 1 1 0 ½ ½ ½ 0 0 ½ 0
14 GM Moradiabadi, Elshan 2.0 M 2534 2427 -1.27 0 1 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 ½ 0 0

[Chessqueen]

Well ... MC the old "dinosaur" seems to have done well and easily beat Arjun Erigaisi ... one of the top new prodigies in chess and much higher rated than Hans Nieman. Only difference is that Hans Nieman is an admitted serial cheater while Arjun has never been accused of cheating. I really doubt that chess is so simple that studying moves from SF NNUE and LC0 can make you play like those engines. For sure it can add depth to your game and you can use some methods that NNUE engines have shown to be extremely strong ... like pushing and embedding a pawn deep ... but MC seems to be the one that has most gained from that.

You could be right that Hans Nieman is just misunderstood young kid who did mistakes and that he is the strongest human chess player ever. But another simple explanation could be that he is cheating. Time will tell which one it is.

If studying moves from SF NNUE and LC0 can make you play like those engines in some types of positions then you can achieve 100% correlation in some games and not be the strongest chess player because not in every game you get the positions that you know to play.

Hans is certainly not the strongest human chess player based on his results but even if in some games(and not in every game) he can play 100% like an engine it does not prove that he is cheating.

It may be interesting to make a competition between humans in predicting different engine moves without using an engine to see if humans really can learn the style of chess engines.

Take 2 strong engines A and B and some human who can prepare by learning both A and B.
You can use A=Stockfish15 B=Dragon3.1 but you can also use something different.

Take many positions and anlayze the position by both A and B and choose from them 1000 positions when the choice of A is different than the choice of B.

What is the percentage correct that the human may guess for A and B out of 1000 positions with no engine help?

Something like 40% for A and 38% for B but if you replace the choice between A and B only 18% for A and 19% for B suggest that the human is able to learn the engine style.

Note that there may be cases when the best strategy of human may be to choose the same move for both A and B if the target of the human is to get the most correct when you get a point for every correct and you can get at most 1 out of 2 by guessing the same move for both engines(because you know in advance that the moves are different) but you have a risk of getting 0 out of 2 if you guess different moves for both engines.

Another, point that I would like to mention is that in the past we have posted several times that even if you take a top player rated around 2680 like Niemann and let him play 1 move 2 moves or three moves from any top engine during his game versus player of the caliber of Carlsen , GM Ding Liren, or GM Caruana, he would not be able to beat them, since during those games he would eventually make a few inferior moves that Carlsen, or GM Ding Liren would immediately punish and turn the game in their favor. So the only explanation is that GM Hans has either reached a very high level in chess or he has to be cheating with more than 33% of the moves.==>forum3/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=80161&p=9289 ... en#p928964

I think that it is possible that a player with rating 2680 beat carlsen in a single game with no cheating.
200 elo difference does not mean that the weaker player has no chance to win in a single game.

There were bigger surprises in chess.

GM Nieman is doing great against GM Vidit, they are currently playing in Lichess==>https://lichess.org/broadcast/universal ... GZj#boards