Why does TCEC use unbalanced opening?

[Marcus9]

True, today the best chess engines play in the best games blitz of the best GM in long TC, but an engine with more time can show us how to beat it

Really?

Please explain how giving an engine more time to think will "show us how to beat it"?

I completely don't follow your reasoning.

My reasoning is as follows:

Shorter time controls will induce mistakes.

Mistakes reveal weaknesses.

Weakness "shows us how to beat it".

How does your reasoning go?

But it doesn't tell us anything about how good an engine is on long TC. We already have CCC and various rating list for this

[Cornfed]

If an engine cannot take an 'edge' or unbalanced position and turn it into a winning game...it does not deserve to be considered a good engine. Simple.

You got it wrong. You can only win a game of chess from a balanced position if your opponent make mistakes. You can play more challenging moves to increase the likelihood of mistakes by the opponent, you can be better at spotting and exploiting the mistakes, but if your opponent is strong enough, it's not going to be enough.

On this, no I think you misunderstand.
If engine A and B played White and Black from the same position....and engine A can win as White, but draw or win as Black, then it has beaten engine B in a head to head match-up.
It IS a game...chess...winning is the desired result. A good mix of unbalanced positions and balanced is simply rational.

[Alayan]

Of course the engine that wins a game pair demonstrates superiority in the opening played in that game pair, I never said otherwise. And a good engine should be able to handle a wide variety of positions, so this tells something about general superiority too.

[Dann Corbit]

TCEC won't change the imbalance book and here is why:
They are using the contests to generate money.
If the contests go 3 wins SF, 0 wins LC0, 97 draws they will lose followers.
And what about controversy? (E.g. us debating it right now)?
Controversy is another form of advertizement. Good for business.
And the side effect was good. We now know about a clear LC0 defect we would not have understood if the contest did not take place.

[mwyoung]

TCEC won't change the imbalance book and here is why:
They are using the contests to generate money.
If the contests go 3 wins SF, 0 wins LC0, 97 draws they will lose followers.
And what about controversy? (E.g. us debating it right now)?
Controversy is another form of advertizement. Good for business.
And the side effect was good. We now know about a clear LC0 defect we would not have understood if the contest did not take place.

Yes, TCEC are doing this for money. And I do not think that TCEC should change their contest. This would be a controversy if TCEC said they were not causing more wins for views.

[marsell]

How many people watch Tcec? Does anyone have exact numbers?

[mwyoung]

I'd like to see TCEC return to using balanced openings, with perhaps a 6 moves per side limit.

And 96 draws out of 100.

Do you want the best quality chess, or just artificial entertainment?

Best quality chess is agreeing to a draw right after starting the clock (both 32 men tbs). And frankly, I can hardly follow the games of 2600 GMs without a help, I am to "profoundly admire" a 4000 Elo level 96% drawfest? Risible endeavor to me.

You can still learn a lot from draws, and I doubt that they'd mainly be boring.
However, everybody to their own taste.

We need to ask ourselves why are we seeing draws.

1. TCEC hardware running Lc0, and Stockfish 12 are so strong that they have nearly solved chess to a draw.
2. As with top level human GM games. When 2 strong and equal players play. The results as theory suggest. The game will end in a draw.

For 1 to be true, then Stockfish 12. In 5 years time could play the best engine in 5 years, or 1,000,000 years. On today's TCEC hardware, and still score a 96% draw rate. That is the logical claim that is being made here by some.

[Dann Corbit]

How many people watch Tcec? Does anyone have exact numbers?

There are 934 right now.

[OneTrickPony]

Do you want the best quality chess, or just artificial entertainment?

Best quality chess from positions that matter. Balanced positions don't matter anymore as they are too easily drawn by current engines on current hardware.

I would love someone to prove me wrong on this. I am willing to offer 100-1 odds. I will take black with draw odds, play main mainlines (Ragozin vs 1.d4, Ruy Lopez vs 1.e4, ...e5 lines vs 1.c4 etc.). I will play a few moves by hand and then just run Stockfish for 1-2 hours per move. My opponent gets unlimited time within reason so we can finish the game. I am willing to accept 5$ bet. That is I donate 500$ to the chess/AI/educational project of your choosing if you win and you donate 5$ to Lichess if I draw or win.

We can start probably next week. I will only accept challanges from people who seem to be serious enough to at least have a chance to make it a fight. I would love to lose btw but I don't believe it's possible anymore.

[mwyoung]

Do you want the best quality chess, or just artificial entertainment?

Best quality chess from positions that matter. Balanced positions don't matter anymore as they are too easily drawn by current engines on current hardware.

I would love someone to prove me wrong on this. I am willing to offer 100-1 odds. I will take black with draw odds, play main mainlines (Ragozin vs 1.d4, Ruy Lopez vs 1.e4, ...e5 lines vs 1.c4 etc.). I will play a few moves by hand and then just run Stockfish for 1-2 hours per move. My opponent gets unlimited time within reason so we can finish the game. I am willing to accept 5$ bet. That is I donate 500$ to the chess/AI/educational project of your choosing if you win and you donate 5$ to Lichess if I draw or win.

We can start probably next week. I will only accept challanges from people who seem to be serious enough to at least have a chance to make it a fight. I would love to lose btw but I don't believe it's possible anymore.

"Balanced positions don't matter anymore as they are too easily drawn by current engines on current hardware."

Prove what! That you have no logic or proof in what you are claiming.

[d]rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1