Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
Yes, the question of the handicap did occur to me when I wrote that, and I'm not sure of the best way unfortunately. You know far better than me, but even with a knight removed I think Komodo would still prevail, or at least it would be a very close game. Never been tried, so we don't know !
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Now compared to S L OW E R Time Control
I was trying to compare an engine that could play chess960 as close to GM Nakamura, and I came with Hermann. Therefore I look at the last Chess960 position that GM Nakamura won the 2009 Chess960 Championship and I gave that position to Hermann to play as White and the Black position to Stockfish to play as Black, but I removed the a8 Knight immediately Hermann pick f4 as the best first move which GM Nakamura also played against GM Aronian but there was also something else that I noticed Hermann evaluated the advantage of White only as 2.45 when I removed the a8 Knight, but if I reverse the position and give it to Stockfish to start Stockfish evaluates his advantage much much greater which tells me that Hermann value of its knight at only 2.49 whereas Stockfish value its Knight higher than 3.23 ==>
[d]1rnkrbbq/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/NRNKRBBQ w - - 0 1[d]
FEN: 1rnkrbbq/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/NRNKRBBQ w - - 0 1
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Now compared to S L OW E R Time Control
Bullet chess for humans has almost nothing to do with any normal time control chess. Two things are very clear:
1. In human vs. computer chess, longer time controls always favor the human (within reason; of course if it's too slow without a break fatigue is an issue, but no one uses time controls that slow). Computers were beating GMs in blitz long before they could do so in rapid, and were winning in rapid long before they could do so in standard chess.
2. In handicap play, longer time controls always favor the handicap receiver. This is obvious, since the handicap giver has to hope for blunders. In normal (not 960) chess, at 3' + 2" Komodo is about even with 2600 level players at knight odds, but below 2000 level at 45' + 15".
Chess 960 is much less familiar for humans, so it should take a much stronger player than 2000 to win a knight odds match at 45' + 15". But if Nakamura was only around equal at 20' + 5", that suggests that a 2700 level human might be a fair match at knight odds 45' + 15". Frankly that is very hard for me to believe. Chess 960 is different from normal chess, but I can't believe it's so different that the break-even rating for a human would rise from less than 2000 to 2700. I would have guessed 2300.
I guess we will have to try it out in a match in the near future. Maybe I'll try a game or two myself just to get a feel for how difficult it is.
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Now compared to S L OW E R Time Control
Bullet chess for humans has almost nothing to do with any normal time control chess. Two things are very clear:
1. In human vs. computer chess, longer time controls always favor the human (within reason; of course if it's too slow without a break fatigue is an issue, but no one uses time controls that slow). Computers were beating GMs in blitz long before they could do so in rapid, and were winning in rapid long before they could do so in standard chess.
2. In handicap play, longer time controls always favor the handicap receiver. This is obvious, since the handicap giver has to hope for blunders. In normal (not 960) chess, at 3' + 2" Komodo is about even with 2600 level players at knight odds, but below 2000 level at 45' + 15".
Chess 960 is much less familiar for humans, so it should take a much stronger player than 2000 to win a knight odds match at 45' + 15". But if Nakamura was only around equal at 20' + 5", that suggests that a 2700 level human might be a fair match at knight odds 45' + 15". Frankly that is very hard for me to believe. Chess 960 is different from normal chess, but I can't believe it's so different that the break-even rating for a human would rise from less than 2000 to 2700. I would have guessed 2300.
I guess we will have to try it out in a match in the near future. Maybe I'll try a game or two myself just to get a feel for how difficult it is.
Those were only the first two games, later he played 4 more games always playing different positions and won 3 and drew one.
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Now compared to S L OW E R Time Control
Bullet chess for humans has almost nothing to do with any normal time control chess. Two things are very clear:
1. In human vs. computer chess, longer time controls always favor the human (within reason; of course if it's too slow without a break fatigue is an issue, but no one uses time controls that slow). Computers were beating GMs in blitz long before they could do so in rapid, and were winning in rapid long before they could do so in standard chess.
2. In handicap play, longer time controls always favor the handicap receiver. This is obvious, since the handicap giver has to hope for blunders. In normal (not 960) chess, at 3' + 2" Komodo is about even with 2600 level players at knight odds, but below 2000 level at 45' + 15".
Chess 960 is much less familiar for humans, so it should take a much stronger player than 2000 to win a knight odds match at 45' + 15". But if Nakamura was only around equal at 20' + 5", that suggests that a 2700 level human might be a fair match at knight odds 45' + 15". Frankly that is very hard for me to believe. Chess 960 is different from normal chess, but I can't believe it's so different that the break-even rating for a human would rise from less than 2000 to 2700. I would have guessed 2300.
I guess we will have to try it out in a match in the near future. Maybe I'll try a game or two myself just to get a feel for how difficult it is.
Those were only the first two games, later he played 4 more games always playing different positions and won 3 and drew one.
Okay, so the computer performed around 2600 level, which at 45' + 15" would perhaps drop to 2500 level. So knight odds in 960 is reasonable for a below-average GM or an IM. Good to know.
Modern Times wrote:Logically I would have thought so, because the human can't rely on memorised opening theory, but if that is true in practice I don't know.
Perhaps the next Komodo vs human match can be chess960.... not that that would answer the question, but it would be good nevertheless
Actually I have been thinking about a Komodo vs. GM (or IM) match in chess960. The problem is that it is totally obvious to me (as a former U.S. Open chess960 champion and a GM in normal chess) that the human will need a larger handicap in chess960. Human GMs are very familiar with all the typical ideas and pawn structures that arise from normal openings in standard chess, but are quite uncomfortable in typical chess960 positions. It's not just that they can't rely on memorized openings (although that's already a big problem); it's more the sheer weirdness of the starting positions. For a computer this makes no difference.
It seems the only easy handicap for chess960 is knight odds, where the computer chooses which knight to remove after the position is chosen. But even at chess960 knight odds is probably too much for a GM; maybe it's okay for an IM, although even that seems questionable to me since the break-even point for knight odds in normal chess appears to be in the 1900s FIDE. But odds of a pawn or two would be too position-dependent, and the Exchange appears not to be enough even for strong GMs in normal chess.
I'm open to suggestions. If I hear something that sounds reasonable and close to fair we might try to work it into our upcoming match on chess.com with IM Daniel Rensch. I feel he's a bit too strong for knight odds even at chess960 (at 45' plus inc).
I spoke with GM Nakamura and he said that with any two pawns Stockfish with the same time control is beating him but with a knight odd even with his super fast PC he is sharing wins with stockfish using the same time control when he beat GM Aronian back in 2009 to become the last Chess960 Champion. ==> https://en.chessbase.com/post/che-claic ... ampionship
What was the time control in these Nakamura vs Stockfish handicap games? Are you saying that results at knight odds were about even? If this was at a non-blitz tc I am surprised. Chess960 must be even harder than I thought it was for humans.
I suppose that Chess960 is harder for humans and the more time you allow the Monster the deeper it calculates. The time control was 20 minutes + 5s game, and his latest PC is an Intel Core i7 Extreme Edition i7-4960X Hexa-core (6 Core) 3.60 GHz Processor.
PS: I don't know if he is better off playing at faster time control where the monster can hardly calculate as deep, like in these games ===>
GM Wesley So lost terribly with Knight Odd Vs Stockfish in Bullet Chess, but he is rated over 100 points less than Nakamura in Bullet Chess, and this version of Stockfish is rated over 200 points above the Rybka that GM Nakamura played back in 2008
Now compared to S L OW E R Time Control
Bullet chess for humans has almost nothing to do with any normal time control chess. Two things are very clear:
1. In human vs. computer chess, longer time controls always favor the human (within reason; of course if it's too slow without a break fatigue is an issue, but no one uses time controls that slow). Computers were beating GMs in blitz long before they could do so in rapid, and were winning in rapid long before they could do so in standard chess.
2. In handicap play, longer time controls always favor the handicap receiver. This is obvious, since the handicap giver has to hope for blunders. In normal (not 960) chess, at 3' + 2" Komodo is about even with 2600 level players at knight odds, but below 2000 level at 45' + 15".
Chess 960 is much less familiar for humans, so it should take a much stronger player than 2000 to win a knight odds match at 45' + 15". But if Nakamura was only around equal at 20' + 5", that suggests that a 2700 level human might be a fair match at knight odds 45' + 15". Frankly that is very hard for me to believe. Chess 960 is different from normal chess, but I can't believe it's so different that the break-even rating for a human would rise from less than 2000 to 2700. I would have guessed 2300.
I guess we will have to try it out in a match in the near future. Maybe I'll try a game or two myself just to get a feel for how difficult it is.
Those were only the first two games, later he played 4 more games always playing different positions and won 3 and drew one.
Okay, so the computer performed around 2600 level, which at 45' + 15" would perhaps drop to 2500 level. So knight odds in 960 is reasonable for a below-average GM or an IM. Good to know.
Mr: Kaufman Here is the initial chess960 position where Booot has the e7 and f7 pawns odds from Stockfish + plus the initial f4 move for White. Just by comparison I believe that either GM Nakamura or Carlsen can be given the odds of 2 pawns in Chess960 at longer time control like game in 30 minutes per side.
[d]nrnkrbbq/pppp2pp/8/8/5P2/8/PPPPP1PP/NRNKRBBQ b - - 0 1[d]
