We are reaching the Max Odds that a top engine can give the top 3 GM's

[lkaufman]

I was also wondering if the Bishop is an equal handicap to the Knight or does it benefit the engine better against a human GM ? .Here is Stockfish giving the c1 Bishop , it is hard to predict if a Knight odds or Bishop odds benefit a human GM more or the Engine. I would like to hear from Mr. Larry Kaufman.

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "MININT-UB2PIMJ"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Stockfish 13"]
[Black "Fruit 2.2.1"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[Time "06:59:44"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[TimeControl "900+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RN1QKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "155"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 c5 2. d5 Qb6 3. e4 f5 4. exf5 Qxb2 5. Nd2 Qe5+ 6. Ne2 Qxd5 7. Ng3 Nf6
8. Bc4 Qe5+ 9. Be2 h5 10. h4 Qf4 11. O-O Qxh4 12. Re1 Kd8 13. Nf3 Qf4 14.
Bd3 Nc6 15. Ne2 Qh6 16. Nh4 Ne5 17. g3 Nd5 18. Be4 Ne3 19. Qb1 N3c4 20. Nf4
Qf6 21. Qb3 d6 22. Ne6+ Bxe6 23. Qxb7 Nb6 24. fxe6 Qxe6 25. Rab1 Qc8 26.
Rxb6 axb6 27. Qxa8 Qxa8 28. Bxa8 Kd7 29. Nf3 Nc6 30. Rb1 Kc7 31. Ng5 Nd8
32. Re1 h4 33. g4 e5 34. Ne4 Be7 35. Nc3 Ne6 36. Be4 Nf4 37. a4 h3 38. Rb1
h2+ 39. Kh1 Rh3 40. f3 Rh6 41. a5 bxa5 42. Rb7+ Kd8 43. Bc6 d5 44. Bxd5
Nxd5 45. Nxd5 Bf6 46. Ra7 Rh3 47. Rxa5 Rxf3 48. Rxc5 Rf2 49. Nxf6 gxf6 50.
g5 Ke7 51. gxf6+ Kxf6 52. Rc4 Kg5 53. Re4 Kf5 54. Rh4 Rd2 55. Rxh2 Rd1+ 56.
Kg2 Kf4 57. c4 e4 58. Rh4+ Ke3 59. Rh3+ Ke2 60. Ra3 e3 61. c5 Rd5 62. Ra2+
Rd2 63. Ra1 Rc2 64. Kg3 Rxc5 65. Ra2+ Kd3 66. Kf3 Rf5+ 67. Kg3 Re5 68. Ra3+
Kc2 69. Ra2+ Kb3 70. Ra1 Kb2 71. Rh1 Kc3 72. Ra1 Kd4 73. Ra4+ Kd5 74. Ra5+
Ke4 75. Rxe5+ Kxe5 76. Kf3 Kd4 77. Ke2 Kc3 78. Ke1 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

Bishop handicap is clearly a larger handicap than knight handicap, regardless of whether it's an engine or a strong human with the extra piece, because the bishop pair is very valuable in chess. But aside from that, there is a good reason why the historical record contains hundreds of knight odds games but zero bishop odds games. Removing a bishop changes the game dramatically, both players will focus on making the single bishop good or bad, White will probably put most pawns on the opposite color. Removing a knight, especially the b1 knight, doesn't change the game other than by putting one side ahead in material, the knights are interchangeable. So knight odds still feels like chess, but bishop odds feels like just a different game. Even rook odds is more normal chess than bishop odds.

[Uri Blass]

Stockfish without a knight drew against Rybka of 2005 that was a chess leader.

I gave Stockfish 3 cores but the point is what is possible to achieve without a knight.

It seems that it is possible to get points even against ccrl rating 2824
https://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi ... 1_0_64-bit


[pgn][Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "stockfish_21051119_x64_avx2"]
[Black "Rybka v1.0 Beta.x64"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameDuration "01:43:43"]
[GameEndTime "2021-05-12T18:19:28.938 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[GameStartTime "2021-05-12T16:35:45.021 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[PlyCount "316"]
[SetUp "1"]
[TimeControl "40/780"]

1. d4 {-4.94/37 68s} Nf6 {+1.42/14 21s} 2. g3 {-4.75/28 9.4s} d5 {+1.58/15 22s}
3. Bg2 {-5.04/31 15s} Nc6 {+1.57/14 4.3s} 4. c4 {-4.67/28 10s}
dxc4 {+1.83/15 15s} 5. d5 {-4.39/33 26s} Ne5 {+2.40/15 15s}
6. Qd4 {-4.25/30 4.6s} Ned7 {+3.95/15 14s} 7. O-O {-4.48/30 24s}
Nb6 {+4.03/15 7.3s} 8. b3 {-4.83/33 88s} cxb3 {+4.56/16 17s}
9. Ba3 {-4.72/30 16s} bxa2 {+5.16/14 15s} 10. Rxa2 {-4.76/31 36s}
Nfxd5 {+5.13/16 116s} 11. Qa1 {-4.90/30 25s} Nf6 {+5.82/15 13s}
12. Nd2 {-4.99/30 50s} c6 {+5.82/15 19s} 13. Bb2 {-5.33/30 33s}
a6 {+5.82/14 9.3s} 14. Bc3 {-4.71/30 14s} Nbd5 {+5.82/14 16s}
15. Be5 {-4.65/30 6.3s} Nb4 {+5.93/12 14s} 16. Rb2 {-4.89/30 13s}
Nfd5 {+5.52/15 22s} 17. e4 {-4.75/29 7.6s} Nd3 {+5.09/15 6.5s}
18. exd5 {-3.03/30 6.3s} Nxe5 {+5.09/15 6.6s} 19. dxc6 {-3.09/34 7.7s}
Nxc6 {+4.77/15 14s} 20. Nc4 {-3.15/36 7.5s} f6 {+4.50/14 15s}
21. Nb6 {-3.41/38 39s} Ra7 {+4.02/16 33s} 22. Rd1 {-0.28/34 4.5s}
Qc7 {+2.18/16 14s} 23. Nxc8 {-0.12/36 8.4s} Qxc8 {+1.06/17 18s}
24. Qc1 {-0.20/38 7.7s} e6 {+0.75/16 30s} 25. Qe3 {-0.22/39 7.6s}
Nd4 {+0.83/16 15s} 26. Qxd4 {-0.16/40 9.2s} Bc5 {+0.83/15 5.2s}
27. Bc6+ {-0.20/40 8.6s} bxc6 {+0.91/16 14s} 28. Qxc5 {-0.17/40 9.1s}
Rc7 {+0.93/15 20s} 29. Rdb1 {-0.11/49 10s} Kf7 {+1.04/14 13s}
30. Qh5+ {-0.11/51 9.1s} g6 {+1.23/15 5.8s} 31. Qh6 {-0.11/52 15s}
Qf8 {+1.29/16 21s} 32. Rb7 {-0.12/55 14s} Qxh6 {+1.38/18 12s}
33. Rxc7+ {-0.12/58 12s} Kg8 {+1.32/19 8.8s} 34. Rb8+ {-0.12/61 14s} Qf8 {0s}
35. Rxf8+ {-0.12/59 14s} Kxf8 {0s} 36. Rxc6 {-0.11/60 31s} Ke7 {+1.34/20 22s}
37. Rxa6 {-0.11/56 14s} e5 {+1.34/20 37s} 38. h4 {-0.11/58 16s}
h5 {+1.37/22 50s} 39. f3 {-0.11/60 35s} Rd8 {+1.42/19 18s}
40. Kf1 {-0.11/58 10s} Rd2 {+1.57/20 11s} 41. Ra7+ {-0.11/64 11s}
Ke6 {+1.63/20 14s} 42. Rg7 {-0.10/52 11s} Kf5 {+1.63/21 18s}
43. Rg8 {-0.03/49 12s} Rc2 {+1.63/20 6.2s} 44. Kg1 {-0.01/50 12s}
Rb2 {+1.63/22 15s} 45. Kf1 {-0.01/55 20s} Rd2 {+1.63/22 27s}
46. Kg1 {0.00/62 31s} Rc2 {+1.63/22 13s} 47. Kf1 {0.00/60 14s}
Rb2 {+1.63/22 16s} 48. Kg1 {0.00/64 14s} Ra2 {+1.63/23 25s}
49. Kf1 {0.00/63 14s} Rh2 {+1.63/22 19s} 50. Kg1 {0.00/64 14s}
Re2 {+1.63/24 15s} 51. Kf1 {0.00/62 18s} Re3 {+1.63/24 32s}
52. Kg2 {0.00/61 16s} e4 {+1.63/22 15s} 53. fxe4+ {0.00/62 15s}
Rxe4 {+1.63/23 7.5s} 54. Kh3 {0.00/62 20s} Re2 {+1.64/21 13s}
55. Rd8 {0.00/64 15s} g5 {+1.64/23 17s} 56. hxg5 {0.00/71 16s}
fxg5 {+1.64/24 6.3s} 57. Rf8+ {0.00/75 19s} Kg6 {+1.64/25 7.3s}
58. Rg8+ {0.00/77 19s} Kf6 {+1.64/26 6.8s} 59. Rf8+ {0.00/75 20s}
Kg7 {+1.64/27 21s} 60. Rb8 {0.00/73 16s} Re3 {+1.64/26 14s}
61. Rb5 {0.00/73 17s} Kf6 {+1.64/28 24s} 62. Rb6+ {0.00/75 19s}
Kf7 {+1.64/25 18s} 63. Rb5 {0.00/47 17s} Kg6 {+1.64/29 21s}
64. Rb6+ {0.00/76 18s} Kf5 {+1.64/29 26s} 65. Rb5+ {0.00/73 23s}
Re5 {+1.64/29 12s} 66. Rb8 {0.00/70 23s} Ra5 {+1.64/25 17s}
67. Rb4 {0.00/68 20s} Ke5 {+1.64/26 18s} 68. Rb6 {0.00/65 20s}
Rc5 {+1.64/27 19s} 69. Rg6 {0.00/70 22s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 22s}
70. Ra6 {0.00/73 39s} Ke4 {+1.64/25 27s} 71. Ra4+ {0.00/74 31s}
Ke5 {+1.64/27 27s} 72. Ra6 {0.00/72 113s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 16s}
73. Ra2 {0.00/55 15s} Kg6 {+1.64/26 133s} 74. Ra6+ {0.00/65 11s}
Kg7 {+0.12/18 19s} 75. Ra7+ {0.00/65 15s} Kg8 {+0.12/18 14s}
76. Ra8+ {0.00/62 18s} Kf7 {+0.08/19 13s} 77. Ra6 {0.00/64 26s}
Rc1 {+1.64/24 11s} 78. Ra7+ {0.00/50 13s} Ke6 {+1.64/26 37s}
79. Ra5 {0.00/57 5.8s} Kf6 {+0.28/18 15s} 80. Ra6+ {0.00/54 3.9s}
Kf5 {+0.28/20 22s} 81. Ra5+ {0.00/62 16s} Kg6 {+0.15/21 15s}
82. Ra6+ {0.00/67 18s} Kg7 {+0.10/21 13s} 83. Kg2 {0.00/77 18s}
Re1 {+1.64/24 16s} 84. Ra7+ {0.00/59 16s} Kf6 {+1.64/26 21s}
85. Ra5 {0.00/65 20s} Rb1 {+1.64/24 22s} 86. Ra6+ {0.00/64 16s}
Kg7 {+1.64/25 22s} 87. Ra7+ {0.00/72 22s} Kg6 {+0.04/27 336s}
88. Ra2 {0.00/61 22s} Rb4 {+1.64/23 5.8s} 89. Ra6+ {0.00/74 25s}
Kf5 {+1.64/23 11s} 90. Kh3 {0.00/72 17s} Rb5 {+1.64/24 6.9s}
91. Ra2 {0.00/64 18s} Ke4 {+1.64/23 6.4s} 92. Ra3 {0.00/69 22s}
Ke5 {+1.64/23 6.2s} 93. Ra2 {0.00/65 17s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 9.9s}
94. Ra4 {0.00/73 19s} Rd5 {+1.64/26 10.0s} 95. Ra2 {0.00/68 18s}
Rd3 {+1.64/25 9.5s} 96. Ra5+ {0.00/78 17s} Kf6 {+1.64/25 2.2s}
97. Ra6+ {0.00/73 127s} Kg7 {+1.64/26 11s} 98. Ra7+ {0.00/72 14s}
Kg6 {+1.64/27 11s} 99. Ra6+ {0.00/65 16s} Kf7 {0.00/28 86s}
100. Ra7+ {0.00/64 15s} Ke6 {+1.64/23 1.3s} 101. Ra6+ {0.00/61 19s}
Rd6 {+1.64/23 4.3s} 102. Ra5 {0.00/60 18s} Kf6 {+1.64/25 8.7s}
103. Ra4 {0.00/62 14s} Rc6 {+1.64/20 4.5s} 104. Ra1 {0.00/63 16s}
Re6 {+1.64/20 4.5s} 105. Rf1+ {0.00/58 15s} Kg7 {+1.64/25 4.7s}
106. Rf2 {0.00/168 30s} h4 {0.00/21 5.9s} 107. gxh4 {0.00/59 16s}
Kg6 {0.00/23 6.5s} 108. hxg5 {0.00/59 13s} Kxg5 {0.00/23 2.1s}
109. Rf1 {0.00/57 100s} Re3+ {+0.04/22 5.2s} 110. Kg2 {0.00/38 9.0s}
Kg4 {+0.03/22 16s} 111. Rd1 {0.00/43 13s} Re2+ {+0.11/20 1.6s}
112. Kf1 {+0.07/55 35s} Rh2 {+0.10/20 6.5s} 113. Rd8 {0.00/34 2.7s}
Kf4 {+0.07/20 12s} 114. Re8 {0.00/39 4.7s} Kf3 {+0.07/19 8.5s}
115. Ke1 {0.00/43 1.2s} Rb2 {+0.07/20 8.8s} 116. Rg8 {0.00/40 1.4s}
Re2+ {+0.07/22 29s} 117. Kd1 {0.00/46 1.6s} Rh2 {+0.06/20 4.7s}
118. Rf8+ {0.00/48 1.0s} Ke4 {+0.07/19 1.7s} 119. Re8+ {0.00/47 0.69s}
Kd4 {+0.06/19 2.3s} 120. Rc8 {0.00/44 0.53s} Rb2 {+0.06/20 12s}
121. Rd8+ {0.00/55 23s} Kc3 {+0.07/24 19s} 122. Rc8+ {0.00/52 26s}
Kd3 {+0.07/23 351s} 123. Rd8+ {0.00/51 21s} Ke3 {+0.07/18 13s}
124. Kc1 {0.00/52 20s} Rf2 {+0.07/20 18s} 125. Kd1 {0.00/47 29s}
Ra2 {+0.07/19 8.8s} 126. Kc1 {0.00/52 20s} Rh2 {+0.07/20 33s}
127. Kd1 {0.00/52 94s} Rg2 {+0.07/19 11s} 128. Rc8 {0.00/52 20s}
Kd3 {+0.07/18 11s} 129. Rd8+ {0.00/51 107s} Kc3 {+0.06/18 7.0s}
130. Rc8+ {0.00/49 17s} Kd4 {+0.06/18 6.2s} 131. Ke1 {0.00/48 15s}
Ra2 {+0.07/17 9.4s} 132. Kf1 {0.00/51 15s} Rb2 {+0.07/17 3.2s}
133. Rd8+ {0.00/52 22s} Ke3 {+0.07/17 9.1s} 134. Re8+ {0.00/50 15s}
Kd3 {+0.06/20 72s} 135. Rd8+ {0.00/49 87s} Ke4 {+0.06/20 38s}
136. Ke1 {0.00/52 12s} Ke3 {+0.07/17 12s} 137. Re8+ {0.00/52 11s}
Kd3 {+0.07/19 8.2s} 138. Rd8+ {0.00/55 12s} Ke4 {+0.06/19 36s}
139. Kd1 {0.00/55 12s} Ra2 {+0.07/16 7.5s} 140. Re8+ {0.00/54 11s}
Kd4 {+0.07/19 36s} 141. Rd8+ {0.00/55 11s} Ke5 {+0.06/17 4.5s}
142. Re8+ {0.00/55 15s} Kd5 {+0.06/16 3.1s} 143. Rd8+ {0.00/53 13s}
Kc4 {+0.06/17 2.4s} 144. Rc8+ {0.00/55 11s} Kd3 {+0.06/19 19s}
145. Rd8+ {0.00/52 11s} Kc3 {+0.06/18 2.4s} 146. Rc8+ {0.00/57 11s}
Kb4 {+0.05/17 3.2s} 147. Rb8+ {0.00/53 11s} Kc5 {+0.06/15 0.81s}
148. Rc8+ {0.00/53 11s} Kb5 {+0.05/16 3.4s} 149. Rb8+ {0.00/54 11s}
Kc6 {+0.03/16 2.7s} 150. Ke1 {0.00/55 9.8s} Kd7 {+0.06/15 6.9s}
151. Rb1 {0.00/58 9.2s} Rh2 {+0.03/15 16s} 152. Rb6 {0.00/63 9.6s}
Ke7 {+0.03/14 1.8s} 153. Rb7+ {0.00/71 9.0s} Kd6 {+0.03/12 2.7s}
154. Ra7 {0.00/76 8.7s} Kd5 {+0.03/10 1.4s} 155. Kf1 {0.00/83 8.5s}
Ke6 {+0.03/11 2.2s} 156. Kg1 {0.00/94 8.0s} Rd2 {0.00/14 1.4s}
157. Ra6+ {0.00/108 7.7s} Ke5 {0.00/18 1.7s} 158. Kh1 {0.00/134 13s}
Rd6 {0.00/20 1.4s, Draw by fifty moves rule} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

[lkaufman]

Stockfish without a knight drew against Rybka of 2005 that was a chess leader.

I gave Stockfish 3 cores but the point is what is possible to achieve without a knight.

It seems that it is possible to get points even against ccrl rating 2824
https://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi ... 1_0_64-bit


[pgn][Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "stockfish_21051119_x64_avx2"]
[Black "Rybka v1.0 Beta.x64"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameDuration "01:43:43"]
[GameEndTime "2021-05-12T18:19:28.938 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[GameStartTime "2021-05-12T16:35:45.021 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[PlyCount "316"]
[SetUp "1"]
[TimeControl "40/780"]

1. d4 {-4.94/37 68s} Nf6 {+1.42/14 21s} 2. g3 {-4.75/28 9.4s} d5 {+1.58/15 22s}
3. Bg2 {-5.04/31 15s} Nc6 {+1.57/14 4.3s} 4. c4 {-4.67/28 10s}
dxc4 {+1.83/15 15s} 5. d5 {-4.39/33 26s} Ne5 {+2.40/15 15s}
6. Qd4 {-4.25/30 4.6s} Ned7 {+3.95/15 14s} 7. O-O {-4.48/30 24s}
Nb6 {+4.03/15 7.3s} 8. b3 {-4.83/33 88s} cxb3 {+4.56/16 17s}
9. Ba3 {-4.72/30 16s} bxa2 {+5.16/14 15s} 10. Rxa2 {-4.76/31 36s}
Nfxd5 {+5.13/16 116s} 11. Qa1 {-4.90/30 25s} Nf6 {+5.82/15 13s}
12. Nd2 {-4.99/30 50s} c6 {+5.82/15 19s} 13. Bb2 {-5.33/30 33s}
a6 {+5.82/14 9.3s} 14. Bc3 {-4.71/30 14s} Nbd5 {+5.82/14 16s}
15. Be5 {-4.65/30 6.3s} Nb4 {+5.93/12 14s} 16. Rb2 {-4.89/30 13s}
Nfd5 {+5.52/15 22s} 17. e4 {-4.75/29 7.6s} Nd3 {+5.09/15 6.5s}
18. exd5 {-3.03/30 6.3s} Nxe5 {+5.09/15 6.6s} 19. dxc6 {-3.09/34 7.7s}
Nxc6 {+4.77/15 14s} 20. Nc4 {-3.15/36 7.5s} f6 {+4.50/14 15s}
21. Nb6 {-3.41/38 39s} Ra7 {+4.02/16 33s} 22. Rd1 {-0.28/34 4.5s}
Qc7 {+2.18/16 14s} 23. Nxc8 {-0.12/36 8.4s} Qxc8 {+1.06/17 18s}
24. Qc1 {-0.20/38 7.7s} e6 {+0.75/16 30s} 25. Qe3 {-0.22/39 7.6s}
Nd4 {+0.83/16 15s} 26. Qxd4 {-0.16/40 9.2s} Bc5 {+0.83/15 5.2s}
27. Bc6+ {-0.20/40 8.6s} bxc6 {+0.91/16 14s} 28. Qxc5 {-0.17/40 9.1s}
Rc7 {+0.93/15 20s} 29. Rdb1 {-0.11/49 10s} Kf7 {+1.04/14 13s}
30. Qh5+ {-0.11/51 9.1s} g6 {+1.23/15 5.8s} 31. Qh6 {-0.11/52 15s}
Qf8 {+1.29/16 21s} 32. Rb7 {-0.12/55 14s} Qxh6 {+1.38/18 12s}
33. Rxc7+ {-0.12/58 12s} Kg8 {+1.32/19 8.8s} 34. Rb8+ {-0.12/61 14s} Qf8 {0s}
35. Rxf8+ {-0.12/59 14s} Kxf8 {0s} 36. Rxc6 {-0.11/60 31s} Ke7 {+1.34/20 22s}
37. Rxa6 {-0.11/56 14s} e5 {+1.34/20 37s} 38. h4 {-0.11/58 16s}
h5 {+1.37/22 50s} 39. f3 {-0.11/60 35s} Rd8 {+1.42/19 18s}
40. Kf1 {-0.11/58 10s} Rd2 {+1.57/20 11s} 41. Ra7+ {-0.11/64 11s}
Ke6 {+1.63/20 14s} 42. Rg7 {-0.10/52 11s} Kf5 {+1.63/21 18s}
43. Rg8 {-0.03/49 12s} Rc2 {+1.63/20 6.2s} 44. Kg1 {-0.01/50 12s}
Rb2 {+1.63/22 15s} 45. Kf1 {-0.01/55 20s} Rd2 {+1.63/22 27s}
46. Kg1 {0.00/62 31s} Rc2 {+1.63/22 13s} 47. Kf1 {0.00/60 14s}
Rb2 {+1.63/22 16s} 48. Kg1 {0.00/64 14s} Ra2 {+1.63/23 25s}
49. Kf1 {0.00/63 14s} Rh2 {+1.63/22 19s} 50. Kg1 {0.00/64 14s}
Re2 {+1.63/24 15s} 51. Kf1 {0.00/62 18s} Re3 {+1.63/24 32s}
52. Kg2 {0.00/61 16s} e4 {+1.63/22 15s} 53. fxe4+ {0.00/62 15s}
Rxe4 {+1.63/23 7.5s} 54. Kh3 {0.00/62 20s} Re2 {+1.64/21 13s}
55. Rd8 {0.00/64 15s} g5 {+1.64/23 17s} 56. hxg5 {0.00/71 16s}
fxg5 {+1.64/24 6.3s} 57. Rf8+ {0.00/75 19s} Kg6 {+1.64/25 7.3s}
58. Rg8+ {0.00/77 19s} Kf6 {+1.64/26 6.8s} 59. Rf8+ {0.00/75 20s}
Kg7 {+1.64/27 21s} 60. Rb8 {0.00/73 16s} Re3 {+1.64/26 14s}
61. Rb5 {0.00/73 17s} Kf6 {+1.64/28 24s} 62. Rb6+ {0.00/75 19s}
Kf7 {+1.64/25 18s} 63. Rb5 {0.00/47 17s} Kg6 {+1.64/29 21s}
64. Rb6+ {0.00/76 18s} Kf5 {+1.64/29 26s} 65. Rb5+ {0.00/73 23s}
Re5 {+1.64/29 12s} 66. Rb8 {0.00/70 23s} Ra5 {+1.64/25 17s}
67. Rb4 {0.00/68 20s} Ke5 {+1.64/26 18s} 68. Rb6 {0.00/65 20s}
Rc5 {+1.64/27 19s} 69. Rg6 {0.00/70 22s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 22s}
70. Ra6 {0.00/73 39s} Ke4 {+1.64/25 27s} 71. Ra4+ {0.00/74 31s}
Ke5 {+1.64/27 27s} 72. Ra6 {0.00/72 113s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 16s}
73. Ra2 {0.00/55 15s} Kg6 {+1.64/26 133s} 74. Ra6+ {0.00/65 11s}
Kg7 {+0.12/18 19s} 75. Ra7+ {0.00/65 15s} Kg8 {+0.12/18 14s}
76. Ra8+ {0.00/62 18s} Kf7 {+0.08/19 13s} 77. Ra6 {0.00/64 26s}
Rc1 {+1.64/24 11s} 78. Ra7+ {0.00/50 13s} Ke6 {+1.64/26 37s}
79. Ra5 {0.00/57 5.8s} Kf6 {+0.28/18 15s} 80. Ra6+ {0.00/54 3.9s}
Kf5 {+0.28/20 22s} 81. Ra5+ {0.00/62 16s} Kg6 {+0.15/21 15s}
82. Ra6+ {0.00/67 18s} Kg7 {+0.10/21 13s} 83. Kg2 {0.00/77 18s}
Re1 {+1.64/24 16s} 84. Ra7+ {0.00/59 16s} Kf6 {+1.64/26 21s}
85. Ra5 {0.00/65 20s} Rb1 {+1.64/24 22s} 86. Ra6+ {0.00/64 16s}
Kg7 {+1.64/25 22s} 87. Ra7+ {0.00/72 22s} Kg6 {+0.04/27 336s}
88. Ra2 {0.00/61 22s} Rb4 {+1.64/23 5.8s} 89. Ra6+ {0.00/74 25s}
Kf5 {+1.64/23 11s} 90. Kh3 {0.00/72 17s} Rb5 {+1.64/24 6.9s}
91. Ra2 {0.00/64 18s} Ke4 {+1.64/23 6.4s} 92. Ra3 {0.00/69 22s}
Ke5 {+1.64/23 6.2s} 93. Ra2 {0.00/65 17s} Kf5 {+1.64/26 9.9s}
94. Ra4 {0.00/73 19s} Rd5 {+1.64/26 10.0s} 95. Ra2 {0.00/68 18s}
Rd3 {+1.64/25 9.5s} 96. Ra5+ {0.00/78 17s} Kf6 {+1.64/25 2.2s}
97. Ra6+ {0.00/73 127s} Kg7 {+1.64/26 11s} 98. Ra7+ {0.00/72 14s}
Kg6 {+1.64/27 11s} 99. Ra6+ {0.00/65 16s} Kf7 {0.00/28 86s}
100. Ra7+ {0.00/64 15s} Ke6 {+1.64/23 1.3s} 101. Ra6+ {0.00/61 19s}
Rd6 {+1.64/23 4.3s} 102. Ra5 {0.00/60 18s} Kf6 {+1.64/25 8.7s}
103. Ra4 {0.00/62 14s} Rc6 {+1.64/20 4.5s} 104. Ra1 {0.00/63 16s}
Re6 {+1.64/20 4.5s} 105. Rf1+ {0.00/58 15s} Kg7 {+1.64/25 4.7s}
106. Rf2 {0.00/168 30s} h4 {0.00/21 5.9s} 107. gxh4 {0.00/59 16s}
Kg6 {0.00/23 6.5s} 108. hxg5 {0.00/59 13s} Kxg5 {0.00/23 2.1s}
109. Rf1 {0.00/57 100s} Re3+ {+0.04/22 5.2s} 110. Kg2 {0.00/38 9.0s}
Kg4 {+0.03/22 16s} 111. Rd1 {0.00/43 13s} Re2+ {+0.11/20 1.6s}
112. Kf1 {+0.07/55 35s} Rh2 {+0.10/20 6.5s} 113. Rd8 {0.00/34 2.7s}
Kf4 {+0.07/20 12s} 114. Re8 {0.00/39 4.7s} Kf3 {+0.07/19 8.5s}
115. Ke1 {0.00/43 1.2s} Rb2 {+0.07/20 8.8s} 116. Rg8 {0.00/40 1.4s}
Re2+ {+0.07/22 29s} 117. Kd1 {0.00/46 1.6s} Rh2 {+0.06/20 4.7s}
118. Rf8+ {0.00/48 1.0s} Ke4 {+0.07/19 1.7s} 119. Re8+ {0.00/47 0.69s}
Kd4 {+0.06/19 2.3s} 120. Rc8 {0.00/44 0.53s} Rb2 {+0.06/20 12s}
121. Rd8+ {0.00/55 23s} Kc3 {+0.07/24 19s} 122. Rc8+ {0.00/52 26s}
Kd3 {+0.07/23 351s} 123. Rd8+ {0.00/51 21s} Ke3 {+0.07/18 13s}
124. Kc1 {0.00/52 20s} Rf2 {+0.07/20 18s} 125. Kd1 {0.00/47 29s}
Ra2 {+0.07/19 8.8s} 126. Kc1 {0.00/52 20s} Rh2 {+0.07/20 33s}
127. Kd1 {0.00/52 94s} Rg2 {+0.07/19 11s} 128. Rc8 {0.00/52 20s}
Kd3 {+0.07/18 11s} 129. Rd8+ {0.00/51 107s} Kc3 {+0.06/18 7.0s}
130. Rc8+ {0.00/49 17s} Kd4 {+0.06/18 6.2s} 131. Ke1 {0.00/48 15s}
Ra2 {+0.07/17 9.4s} 132. Kf1 {0.00/51 15s} Rb2 {+0.07/17 3.2s}
133. Rd8+ {0.00/52 22s} Ke3 {+0.07/17 9.1s} 134. Re8+ {0.00/50 15s}
Kd3 {+0.06/20 72s} 135. Rd8+ {0.00/49 87s} Ke4 {+0.06/20 38s}
136. Ke1 {0.00/52 12s} Ke3 {+0.07/17 12s} 137. Re8+ {0.00/52 11s}
Kd3 {+0.07/19 8.2s} 138. Rd8+ {0.00/55 12s} Ke4 {+0.06/19 36s}
139. Kd1 {0.00/55 12s} Ra2 {+0.07/16 7.5s} 140. Re8+ {0.00/54 11s}
Kd4 {+0.07/19 36s} 141. Rd8+ {0.00/55 11s} Ke5 {+0.06/17 4.5s}
142. Re8+ {0.00/55 15s} Kd5 {+0.06/16 3.1s} 143. Rd8+ {0.00/53 13s}
Kc4 {+0.06/17 2.4s} 144. Rc8+ {0.00/55 11s} Kd3 {+0.06/19 19s}
145. Rd8+ {0.00/52 11s} Kc3 {+0.06/18 2.4s} 146. Rc8+ {0.00/57 11s}
Kb4 {+0.05/17 3.2s} 147. Rb8+ {0.00/53 11s} Kc5 {+0.06/15 0.81s}
148. Rc8+ {0.00/53 11s} Kb5 {+0.05/16 3.4s} 149. Rb8+ {0.00/54 11s}
Kc6 {+0.03/16 2.7s} 150. Ke1 {0.00/55 9.8s} Kd7 {+0.06/15 6.9s}
151. Rb1 {0.00/58 9.2s} Rh2 {+0.03/15 16s} 152. Rb6 {0.00/63 9.6s}
Ke7 {+0.03/14 1.8s} 153. Rb7+ {0.00/71 9.0s} Kd6 {+0.03/12 2.7s}
154. Ra7 {0.00/76 8.7s} Kd5 {+0.03/10 1.4s} 155. Kf1 {0.00/83 8.5s}
Ke6 {+0.03/11 2.2s} 156. Kg1 {0.00/94 8.0s} Rd2 {0.00/14 1.4s}
157. Ra6+ {0.00/108 7.7s} Ke5 {0.00/18 1.7s} 158. Kh1 {0.00/134 13s}
Rd6 {0.00/20 1.4s, Draw by fifty moves rule} 1/2-1/2

[/pgn]

I recall that versions of Rybka thru 2.2, when I joined the team, were quite strange with regard to material, trading, etc. Probably version 1 had no idea about seeking trades when winning. This was all remedied by version 2.3.2a. If we're trying to see which old programs are bad with an extra piece, this is a prime example. But I think we're more interested in which programs are best at giving knight odds, in which case we should use a program on the other side that seems to know what to do with a decisive advantage. So far just Benjamin and Lc0cpu (with node restriction) fit the bill. Benjamin does seem to have a small problem with regard to the fifty move rule, I think it's calling it a draw a ply early and then occasionally losing on time the next move when the game isn't terminated by the GUI. Annoying but rare.

[Uri Blass]

Benjamin still did not score 100% against Dragon and the question is what is the minimal level that can score 100%
when it play against top programs.

Rybka2.3.2a is a candidate and in my test it won against latest stockfish that for some reason allowed trading pieces(maybe because it calculated that other options are worse so I do not know if it was a mistake)

This time I gave stockfish 7 cores and contempt 100 against 1 core of Rybka.

[pgn][Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "stockfish_21051119_x64_avx2"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64"]
[Result "0-1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameDuration "00:40:10"]
[GameEndTime "2021-05-12T20:34:12.887 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[GameStartTime "2021-05-12T19:54:02.631 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[PlyCount "136"]
[SetUp "1"]
[TimeControl "40/780"]

1. d4 {-4.95/35 46s} Nf6 {+1.82/17 29s} 2. g3 {-4.92/30 9.6s} d6 {+1.82/16 19s}
3. Bg2 {-4.62/29 8.0s} g6 {+1.85/17 18s} 4. e4 {-4.49/30 28s} Bg7 {+1.85/16 26s}
5. O-O {-4.81/33 9.6s} O-O {+1.91/16 27s} 6. e5 {-4.87/34 48s}
dxe5 {+2.31/18 20s} 7. dxe5 {-5.00/31 12s} Ng4 {+2.36/18 7.1s}
8. f4 {-4.87/29 7.2s} Nc6 {+2.13/17 28s} 9. Na3 {-4.94/35 78s}
Be6 {+2.42/16 6.7s} 10. h3 {-5.09/32 29s} Nh6 {+2.42/15 2.8s}
11. c3 {-5.17/34 40s} Qxd1 {+2.45/15 8.1s} 12. Rxd1 {-5.05/29 4.7s}
a6 {+2.54/15 3.2s} 13. Bd2 {-4.65/33 36s} Rfd8 {+2.62/15 10s}
14. Be3 {-4.87/31 6.8s} Rxd1+ {+2.75/15 16s} 15. Rxd1 {-4.71/32 6.3s}
f6 {+2.89/16 4.3s} 16. exf6 {-4.94/34 11s} exf6 {+2.96/17 12s}
17. b3 {-4.94/36 48s} Nf5 {+3.15/17 3.3s} 18. Bf2 {-4.69/32 7.3s}
Rd8 {+3.17/16 4.1s} 19. Rxd8+ {-4.87/32 9.2s} Nxd8 {+2.91/15 0s}
20. Kh2 {-5.09/36 67s} Nd6 {+3.46/18 7.5s} 21. c4 {-5.04/30 10s}
Bf5 {+3.58/17 20s} 22. c5 {-5.17/30 9.7s} Ne4 {+3.70/18 3.0s}
23. g4 {-4.67/31 7.0s} Nxf2 {+4.65/17 2.9s} 24. gxf5 {-4.86/33 11s}
gxf5 {+4.92/18 16s} 25. Nc2 {-5.43/38 55s} Ne4 {+5.01/17 12s}
26. Nd4 {-5.66/38 42s} Bh6 {+4.48/15 0s} 27. Bf1 {-5.61/39 32s}
Bxf4+ {+5.36/15 11s} 28. Kg2 {-5.94/30 6.9s} Nxc5 {+5.46/16 17s}
29. b4 {-5.94/36 28s} Nce6 {+5.69/15 26s} 30. Bc4 {-6.12/30 3.2s}
Kf7 {+4.62/13 0s} 31. Nxf5 {-6.03/30 3.1s} Kg6 {+5.90/15 13s}
32. Bd3 {-6.29/32 22s} Bd2 {+6.03/16 22s} 33. Bb1 {-6.40/30 11s}
Bxb4 {+6.45/13 17s} 34. Ne3+ {-6.47/32 12s} Kg7 {+6.63/15 44s}
35. Nf5+ {-6.55/31 1.5s} Kf7 {+6.63/14 26s} 36. Kf3 {-6.53/30 8.2s}
Nc6 {+6.68/13 20s} 37. h4 {-6.39/27 3.7s} Ne5+ {+6.85/14 25s}
38. Ke3 {-6.40/23 0.58s} Bc5+ {+6.99/16 35s} 39. Kd2 {-6.77/28 1.9s}
b5 {+7.01/16 28s} 40. a4 {-6.54/19 0.39s} bxa4 {+7.70/13 20s}
41. h5 {-10.34/38 78s} a3 {+7.94/15 16s} 42. Ba2 {-10.48/39 12s}
Nf3+ {+8.28/13 4.9s} 43. Kc3 {-12.23/40 115s} Nd4 {+8.82/17 37s}
44. Nh6+ {-13.40/40 127s} Kg7 {+8.62/13 3.8s} 45. Ng4 {-13.54/29 7.7s}
Nf4 {+8.82/17 41s} 46. h6+ {-12.24/33 28s} Kg6 {+9.11/17 26s}
47. Kc4 {-13.37/32 21s} Ba7 {+9.08/15 13s} 48. Kc3 {-12.69/36 31s}
Nf3 {+9.99/14 9.8s} 49. Kb4 {-21.85/31 87s} f5 {+11.08/16 9.7s}
50. Nh2 {-24.32/30 67s} Nxh2 {+11.65/14 7.9s} 51. Bb3 {-29.63/28 52s}
Nh5 {+12.53/14 14s} 52. Kxa3 {-73.20/35 22s} f4 {+12.50/13 7.6s}
53. Kb4 {-113.70/38 13s} f3 {+13.12/14 14s} 54. Bc4 {-M32/69 8.4s}
f2 {+12.93/11 3.9s} 55. Be2 {-M30/59 2.7s} c5+ {+16.50/14 25s}
56. Kc3 {-M26/64 2.8s} f1=Q {+19.80/14 10s} 57. Bd3+ {-M26/58 3.0s}
Qxd3+ {+14.82/12 41s} 58. Kxd3 {-M24/59 2.9s} Nf4+ {+22.94/14 28s}
59. Kd2 {-M22/58 3.4s} Nf1+ {+M35/13 6.4s} 60. Kc2 {-M18/65 7.0s}
c4 {+M25/12 1.1s} 61. Kb1 {-M16/67 2.2s} Bd4 {+M19/7 0.028s}
62. Kc2 {-M14/82 3.2s} Ne3+ {+M17/4 0.004s} 63. Kc1 {-M12/132 3.1s}
c3 {+M11/3 0s} 64. Kb1 {-M10/212 0.50s} c2+ {+M9/3 0.001s}
65. Kc1 {-M8/245 0.049s} Ne2+ {+M7/3 0.001s} 66. Kd2 {-M6/245 0.008s}
c1=Q+ {+M5/3 0s} 67. Kxe2 {-M4/245 0.006s} Qf1+ {+M3/3 0.001s}
68. Kd2 {-M2/245 0.003s} Qd1# {+M1/3 0.001s, Black mates} 0-1

[/pgn]

[lkaufman]

Benjamin still did not score 100% against Dragon and the question is what is the minimal level that can score 100%
when it play against top programs.

Rybka2.3.2a is a candidate and in my test it won against latest stockfish that for some reason allowed trading pieces(maybe because it calculated that other options are worse so I do not know if it was a mistake)

This time I gave stockfish 7 cores and contempt 100 against 1 core of Rybka.

[pgn][Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "stockfish_21051119_x64_avx2"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64"]
[Result "0-1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameDuration "00:40:10"]
[GameEndTime "2021-05-12T20:34:12.887 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[GameStartTime "2021-05-12T19:54:02.631 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[PlyCount "136"]
[SetUp "1"]
[TimeControl "40/780"]

1. d4 {-4.95/35 46s} Nf6 {+1.82/17 29s} 2. g3 {-4.92/30 9.6s} d6 {+1.82/16 19s}
3. Bg2 {-4.62/29 8.0s} g6 {+1.85/17 18s} 4. e4 {-4.49/30 28s} Bg7 {+1.85/16 26s}
5. O-O {-4.81/33 9.6s} O-O {+1.91/16 27s} 6. e5 {-4.87/34 48s}
dxe5 {+2.31/18 20s} 7. dxe5 {-5.00/31 12s} Ng4 {+2.36/18 7.1s}
8. f4 {-4.87/29 7.2s} Nc6 {+2.13/17 28s} 9. Na3 {-4.94/35 78s}
Be6 {+2.42/16 6.7s} 10. h3 {-5.09/32 29s} Nh6 {+2.42/15 2.8s}
11. c3 {-5.17/34 40s} Qxd1 {+2.45/15 8.1s} 12. Rxd1 {-5.05/29 4.7s}
a6 {+2.54/15 3.2s} 13. Bd2 {-4.65/33 36s} Rfd8 {+2.62/15 10s}
14. Be3 {-4.87/31 6.8s} Rxd1+ {+2.75/15 16s} 15. Rxd1 {-4.71/32 6.3s}
f6 {+2.89/16 4.3s} 16. exf6 {-4.94/34 11s} exf6 {+2.96/17 12s}
17. b3 {-4.94/36 48s} Nf5 {+3.15/17 3.3s} 18. Bf2 {-4.69/32 7.3s}
Rd8 {+3.17/16 4.1s} 19. Rxd8+ {-4.87/32 9.2s} Nxd8 {+2.91/15 0s}
20. Kh2 {-5.09/36 67s} Nd6 {+3.46/18 7.5s} 21. c4 {-5.04/30 10s}
Bf5 {+3.58/17 20s} 22. c5 {-5.17/30 9.7s} Ne4 {+3.70/18 3.0s}
23. g4 {-4.67/31 7.0s} Nxf2 {+4.65/17 2.9s} 24. gxf5 {-4.86/33 11s}
gxf5 {+4.92/18 16s} 25. Nc2 {-5.43/38 55s} Ne4 {+5.01/17 12s}
26. Nd4 {-5.66/38 42s} Bh6 {+4.48/15 0s} 27. Bf1 {-5.61/39 32s}
Bxf4+ {+5.36/15 11s} 28. Kg2 {-5.94/30 6.9s} Nxc5 {+5.46/16 17s}
29. b4 {-5.94/36 28s} Nce6 {+5.69/15 26s} 30. Bc4 {-6.12/30 3.2s}
Kf7 {+4.62/13 0s} 31. Nxf5 {-6.03/30 3.1s} Kg6 {+5.90/15 13s}
32. Bd3 {-6.29/32 22s} Bd2 {+6.03/16 22s} 33. Bb1 {-6.40/30 11s}
Bxb4 {+6.45/13 17s} 34. Ne3+ {-6.47/32 12s} Kg7 {+6.63/15 44s}
35. Nf5+ {-6.55/31 1.5s} Kf7 {+6.63/14 26s} 36. Kf3 {-6.53/30 8.2s}
Nc6 {+6.68/13 20s} 37. h4 {-6.39/27 3.7s} Ne5+ {+6.85/14 25s}
38. Ke3 {-6.40/23 0.58s} Bc5+ {+6.99/16 35s} 39. Kd2 {-6.77/28 1.9s}
b5 {+7.01/16 28s} 40. a4 {-6.54/19 0.39s} bxa4 {+7.70/13 20s}
41. h5 {-10.34/38 78s} a3 {+7.94/15 16s} 42. Ba2 {-10.48/39 12s}
Nf3+ {+8.28/13 4.9s} 43. Kc3 {-12.23/40 115s} Nd4 {+8.82/17 37s}
44. Nh6+ {-13.40/40 127s} Kg7 {+8.62/13 3.8s} 45. Ng4 {-13.54/29 7.7s}
Nf4 {+8.82/17 41s} 46. h6+ {-12.24/33 28s} Kg6 {+9.11/17 26s}
47. Kc4 {-13.37/32 21s} Ba7 {+9.08/15 13s} 48. Kc3 {-12.69/36 31s}
Nf3 {+9.99/14 9.8s} 49. Kb4 {-21.85/31 87s} f5 {+11.08/16 9.7s}
50. Nh2 {-24.32/30 67s} Nxh2 {+11.65/14 7.9s} 51. Bb3 {-29.63/28 52s}
Nh5 {+12.53/14 14s} 52. Kxa3 {-73.20/35 22s} f4 {+12.50/13 7.6s}
53. Kb4 {-113.70/38 13s} f3 {+13.12/14 14s} 54. Bc4 {-M32/69 8.4s}
f2 {+12.93/11 3.9s} 55. Be2 {-M30/59 2.7s} c5+ {+16.50/14 25s}
56. Kc3 {-M26/64 2.8s} f1=Q {+19.80/14 10s} 57. Bd3+ {-M26/58 3.0s}
Qxd3+ {+14.82/12 41s} 58. Kxd3 {-M24/59 2.9s} Nf4+ {+22.94/14 28s}
59. Kd2 {-M22/58 3.4s} Nf1+ {+M35/13 6.4s} 60. Kc2 {-M18/65 7.0s}
c4 {+M25/12 1.1s} 61. Kb1 {-M16/67 2.2s} Bd4 {+M19/7 0.028s}
62. Kc2 {-M14/82 3.2s} Ne3+ {+M17/4 0.004s} 63. Kc1 {-M12/132 3.1s}
c3 {+M11/3 0s} 64. Kb1 {-M10/212 0.50s} c2+ {+M9/3 0.001s}
65. Kc1 {-M8/245 0.049s} Ne2+ {+M7/3 0.001s} 66. Kd2 {-M6/245 0.008s}
c1=Q+ {+M5/3 0s} 67. Kxe2 {-M4/245 0.006s} Qf1+ {+M3/3 0.001s}
68. Kd2 {-M2/245 0.003s} Qd1# {+M1/3 0.001s, Black mates} 0-1

[/pgn]

Asking for 100% wins is a bit unreasonable in my opinion. Even Dragon vs Dragon or Stockfish vs Stockfish might draw one game in ten thousand or so at knight odds due to failure to recognize obscure fortress draws for example, and who has computer time to devote to play 10,000 Rapid games like this? For me the interesting question is the point at which the weaker engine crosses 50% outright wins, meaning it would win a match at knight odds with Armageddon scoring of draws counting as wins for the odds-giver. Benjamin is already above that point in Rapid games with Dragon 2 on one thread, it's about even that way if Dragon uses four threads.

[Chessqueen]

Benjamin still did not score 100% against Dragon and the question is what is the minimal level that can score 100%
when it play against top programs.

Rybka2.3.2a is a candidate and in my test it won against latest stockfish that for some reason allowed trading pieces(maybe because it calculated that other options are worse so I do not know if it was a mistake)

This time I gave stockfish 7 cores and contempt 100 against 1 core of Rybka.

[pgn][Event "?"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "stockfish_21051119_x64_avx2"]
[Black "Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64"]
[Result "0-1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[GameDuration "00:40:10"]
[GameEndTime "2021-05-12T20:34:12.887 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[GameStartTime "2021-05-12T19:54:02.631 שעון קיץ ירושלים"]
[PlyCount "136"]
[SetUp "1"]
[TimeControl "40/780"]

1. d4 {-4.95/35 46s} Nf6 {+1.82/17 29s} 2. g3 {-4.92/30 9.6s} d6 {+1.82/16 19s}
3. Bg2 {-4.62/29 8.0s} g6 {+1.85/17 18s} 4. e4 {-4.49/30 28s} Bg7 {+1.85/16 26s}
5. O-O {-4.81/33 9.6s} O-O {+1.91/16 27s} 6. e5 {-4.87/34 48s}
dxe5 {+2.31/18 20s} 7. dxe5 {-5.00/31 12s} Ng4 {+2.36/18 7.1s}
8. f4 {-4.87/29 7.2s} Nc6 {+2.13/17 28s} 9. Na3 {-4.94/35 78s}
Be6 {+2.42/16 6.7s} 10. h3 {-5.09/32 29s} Nh6 {+2.42/15 2.8s}
11. c3 {-5.17/34 40s} Qxd1 {+2.45/15 8.1s} 12. Rxd1 {-5.05/29 4.7s}
a6 {+2.54/15 3.2s} 13. Bd2 {-4.65/33 36s} Rfd8 {+2.62/15 10s}
14. Be3 {-4.87/31 6.8s} Rxd1+ {+2.75/15 16s} 15. Rxd1 {-4.71/32 6.3s}
f6 {+2.89/16 4.3s} 16. exf6 {-4.94/34 11s} exf6 {+2.96/17 12s}
17. b3 {-4.94/36 48s} Nf5 {+3.15/17 3.3s} 18. Bf2 {-4.69/32 7.3s}
Rd8 {+3.17/16 4.1s} 19. Rxd8+ {-4.87/32 9.2s} Nxd8 {+2.91/15 0s}
20. Kh2 {-5.09/36 67s} Nd6 {+3.46/18 7.5s} 21. c4 {-5.04/30 10s}
Bf5 {+3.58/17 20s} 22. c5 {-5.17/30 9.7s} Ne4 {+3.70/18 3.0s}
23. g4 {-4.67/31 7.0s} Nxf2 {+4.65/17 2.9s} 24. gxf5 {-4.86/33 11s}
gxf5 {+4.92/18 16s} 25. Nc2 {-5.43/38 55s} Ne4 {+5.01/17 12s}
26. Nd4 {-5.66/38 42s} Bh6 {+4.48/15 0s} 27. Bf1 {-5.61/39 32s}
Bxf4+ {+5.36/15 11s} 28. Kg2 {-5.94/30 6.9s} Nxc5 {+5.46/16 17s}
29. b4 {-5.94/36 28s} Nce6 {+5.69/15 26s} 30. Bc4 {-6.12/30 3.2s}
Kf7 {+4.62/13 0s} 31. Nxf5 {-6.03/30 3.1s} Kg6 {+5.90/15 13s}
32. Bd3 {-6.29/32 22s} Bd2 {+6.03/16 22s} 33. Bb1 {-6.40/30 11s}
Bxb4 {+6.45/13 17s} 34. Ne3+ {-6.47/32 12s} Kg7 {+6.63/15 44s}
35. Nf5+ {-6.55/31 1.5s} Kf7 {+6.63/14 26s} 36. Kf3 {-6.53/30 8.2s}
Nc6 {+6.68/13 20s} 37. h4 {-6.39/27 3.7s} Ne5+ {+6.85/14 25s}
38. Ke3 {-6.40/23 0.58s} Bc5+ {+6.99/16 35s} 39. Kd2 {-6.77/28 1.9s}
b5 {+7.01/16 28s} 40. a4 {-6.54/19 0.39s} bxa4 {+7.70/13 20s}
41. h5 {-10.34/38 78s} a3 {+7.94/15 16s} 42. Ba2 {-10.48/39 12s}
Nf3+ {+8.28/13 4.9s} 43. Kc3 {-12.23/40 115s} Nd4 {+8.82/17 37s}
44. Nh6+ {-13.40/40 127s} Kg7 {+8.62/13 3.8s} 45. Ng4 {-13.54/29 7.7s}
Nf4 {+8.82/17 41s} 46. h6+ {-12.24/33 28s} Kg6 {+9.11/17 26s}
47. Kc4 {-13.37/32 21s} Ba7 {+9.08/15 13s} 48. Kc3 {-12.69/36 31s}
Nf3 {+9.99/14 9.8s} 49. Kb4 {-21.85/31 87s} f5 {+11.08/16 9.7s}
50. Nh2 {-24.32/30 67s} Nxh2 {+11.65/14 7.9s} 51. Bb3 {-29.63/28 52s}
Nh5 {+12.53/14 14s} 52. Kxa3 {-73.20/35 22s} f4 {+12.50/13 7.6s}
53. Kb4 {-113.70/38 13s} f3 {+13.12/14 14s} 54. Bc4 {-M32/69 8.4s}
f2 {+12.93/11 3.9s} 55. Be2 {-M30/59 2.7s} c5+ {+16.50/14 25s}
56. Kc3 {-M26/64 2.8s} f1=Q {+19.80/14 10s} 57. Bd3+ {-M26/58 3.0s}
Qxd3+ {+14.82/12 41s} 58. Kxd3 {-M24/59 2.9s} Nf4+ {+22.94/14 28s}
59. Kd2 {-M22/58 3.4s} Nf1+ {+M35/13 6.4s} 60. Kc2 {-M18/65 7.0s}
c4 {+M25/12 1.1s} 61. Kb1 {-M16/67 2.2s} Bd4 {+M19/7 0.028s}
62. Kc2 {-M14/82 3.2s} Ne3+ {+M17/4 0.004s} 63. Kc1 {-M12/132 3.1s}
c3 {+M11/3 0s} 64. Kb1 {-M10/212 0.50s} c2+ {+M9/3 0.001s}
65. Kc1 {-M8/245 0.049s} Ne2+ {+M7/3 0.001s} 66. Kd2 {-M6/245 0.008s}
c1=Q+ {+M5/3 0s} 67. Kxe2 {-M4/245 0.006s} Qf1+ {+M3/3 0.001s}
68. Kd2 {-M2/245 0.003s} Qd1# {+M1/3 0.001s, Black mates} 0-1

[/pgn]

Asking for 100% wins is a bit unreasonable in my opinion. Even Dragon vs Dragon or Stockfish vs Stockfish might draw one game in ten thousand or so at knight odds due to failure to recognize obscure fortress draws for example, and who has computer time to devote to play 10,000 Rapid games like this? For me the interesting question is the point at which the weaker engine crosses 50% outright wins, meaning it would win a match at knight odds with Armageddon scoring of draws counting as wins for the odds-giver. Benjamin is already above that point in Rapid games with Dragon 2 on one thread, it's about even that way if Dragon uses four threads.

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "MININT-UB2PIMJ"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Stockfish 13"]
[Black "Benjamin 1.0"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[Time "13:51:37"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[TimeControl "900+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "101"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nc3 Bf5 3. f3 e6 4. e4 dxe4 5. fxe4 Bg6 6. Bb5+ c6 7. Be2 e5 8.
dxe5 Qxd1+ 9. Bxd1 Na6 10. Bd2 Bc5 11. Bf3 Bd4 12. h4 h5 13. e6 Nf6 14.
exf7+ Kxf7 15. O-O-O Nc5 16. Ne2 Be5 17. Nf4 Bxe4 18. Be2 Bxf4 19. Bxf4
Bxg2 20. Rh2 Bd5 21. Rg1 Rae8 22. Bd2 Re4 23. b3 Ng4 24. Bxg4 hxg4 25. Rhg2
Rxh4 26. Bg5 Rh5 27. Rxg4 Rxg4 28. Rxg4 Be6 29. Rg1 Ne4 30. Be3 b6 31. Rf1+
Ke7 32. a4 g5 33. a5 c5 34. Kb2 g4 35. Rg1 bxa5 36. Ra1 c4 37. bxc4 a6 38.
c5 Nxc5 39. Kc3 a4 40. Re1 Ne4+ 41. Kb4 Bd7 42. Ka3 g3 43. Re2 Bb5 44. Re1
Bc6 45. Rg1 Rh2 46. Rc1 g2 47. Bd4 Rh1 48. Rg1 Nc3 49. Bc5+ Ke6 50. Rxg2
Bxg2 51. Kb4 {White resigns} *[/pgn]

[Chessqueen]

What I would like to know is what is the conclusion , in relation to top engine like Komodo or Stockfish vs human to give knight odds and what would be the top human rating that we believe that a human could be and Komodo would still beat the human with a Knight Odds at 15'+10" . These engine like Benjamin 1.0 or Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64 can give us an idea, but still humans in my understanding are more capable than any engine to take advantage of any given Knight Odds. Since human would constantly keep putting pressure to exchange in any given opportunity and many engines do NOT. So my estimate is probably a human with a minimum 2600 FIDE rating is sufficient to beat Komodo or Stockfish at TC 15'+10".

[pgn][Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "MININT-UB2PIMJ"]
[Date "2021.05.12"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Stockfish 13"]
[Black "Benjamin 1.0"]
[Result "0-1"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[Time "15:16:37"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[TimeControl "900+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "normal"]
[PlyCount "67"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 d5 2. Nf3 Bf5 3. Bg5 Nf6 4. Bxf6 exf6 5. e3 Bd6 6. Bd3 Qd7 7. O-O O-O
8. b3 Bxd3 9. Qxd3 Na6 10. c4 Ba3 11. Qe2 Rfe8 12. c5 Nb4 13. Rad1 a5 14.
Nd2 a4 15. bxa4 Qxa4 16. Nb1 b6 17. cxb6 cxb6 18. h3 Rec8 19. Nxa3 Qxa3 20.
Qb5 Nxa2 21. Ra1 Nc3 22. Qxb6 Qxa1 23. Rxa1 Rxa1+ 24. Kh2 f5 25. Qb3 g6 26.
Qb7 Rca8 27. f3 Nd1 28. Qe7 R1a3 29. e4 dxe4 30. fxe4 Ne3 31. Qe5 Ra2 32.
Kg3 Nxg2 33. exf5 h5 34. Kf3 {White resigns} *[/pgn]

[lkaufman]

[quote=Chessqueen post_id=892782 time=1620853264 user_id=10732]
What I would like to know is what is the conclusion , in relation to top engine like Komodo or Stockfish vs human to give knight odds and what would be the top human rating that we believe that a human could be and Komodo would still beat the human with a Knight Odds at 15'+10" . These engine like Benjamin 1.0 or Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64 can give us an idea, but still humans in my understanding are more capable than any engine to take advantage of any given Knight Odds. Since human would constantly keep putting pressure to exchange in any given opportunity and many engines do NOT. So my estimate is probably a human with a minimum 2600 FIDE rating is sufficient to beat Komodo or Stockfish at TC 15'+10".

These engine vs engine odds matches just put an upper limit on the human rating needed, they don't put a lower limit on it. In my current run Benjamin is even winning more than half the games at knight odds from Dragon 2 at 3' + 2", but that's with just one thread for each. If we define the goal for the human to be able to actually win a majority of the games played (not just win more than lose) at the 15' + 10" Rapid TC against whichever engine is best at this, which is essentially Armageddon knight odds, then I believe the minimum FIDE rating needed now is somewhere in the 2400 to 2500 range. GM David Smerdon beat Komodo (pre-Dragon) by 5 wins to 1 at that tc last year, and he's just over 2500. Probably Dragon has improved enough to make this something like 4 to 2 or perhaps 3 to 2 with a draw in his favor if we replay the match now. The games with Benjamin suggest that even one thread Dragon needs a 2500 opponent for this, but I don't think that's close to the truth for a human opponent. But we'll just have to schedule a human match to find out the answer.

[Chessqueen]

What I would like to know is what is the conclusion , in relation to top engine like Komodo or Stockfish vs human to give knight odds and what would be the top human rating that we believe that a human could be and Komodo would still beat the human with a Knight Odds at 15'+10" . These engine like Benjamin 1.0 or Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64 can give us an idea, but still humans in my understanding are more capable than any engine to take advantage of any given Knight Odds. Since human would constantly keep putting pressure to exchange in any given opportunity and many engines do NOT. So my estimate is probably a human with a minimum 2600 FIDE rating is sufficient to beat Komodo or Stockfish at TC 15'+10".

These engine vs engine odds matches just put an upper limit on the human rating needed, they don't put a lower limit on it. In my current run Benjamin is even winning more than half the games at knight odds from Dragon 2 at 3' + 2", but that's with just one thread for each. If we define the goal for the human to be able to actually win a majority of the games played (not just win more than lose) at the 15' + 10" Rapid TC against whichever engine is best at this, which is essentially Armageddon knight odds, then I believe the minimum FIDE rating needed now is somewhere in the 2400 to 2500 range. GM David Smerdon beat Komodo (pre-Dragon) by 5 wins to 1 at that tc last year, and he's just over 2500. Probably Dragon has improved enough to make this something like 4 to 2 or perhaps 3 to 2 with a draw in his favor if we replay the match now. The games with Benjamin suggest that even one thread Dragon needs a 2500 opponent for this, but I don't think that's close to the truth for a human opponent. But we'll just have to schedule a human match to find out the answer.

So in order to get an estimate of how many threads todays most current Komodo needs to equal the version of Komodo that played versus Smerdon with x amount of threads, and maybe you could determine how many threads is needed with the most current Komodo to beat Smerdon at 10'+5" . So if you figure that the current Komodo only needs 8 threads to be equal to the version that played versus Smerdon with 32 threads, then you can get an estimate of what TC is also needed to beat Smerdon

[lkaufman]

What I would like to know is what is the conclusion , in relation to top engine like Komodo or Stockfish vs human to give knight odds and what would be the top human rating that we believe that a human could be and Komodo would still beat the human with a Knight Odds at 15'+10" . These engine like Benjamin 1.0 or Rybkav2.3.2a.mp.x64 can give us an idea, but still humans in my understanding are more capable than any engine to take advantage of any given Knight Odds. Since human would constantly keep putting pressure to exchange in any given opportunity and many engines do NOT. So my estimate is probably a human with a minimum 2600 FIDE rating is sufficient to beat Komodo or Stockfish at TC 15'+10".

These engine vs engine odds matches just put an upper limit on the human rating needed, they don't put a lower limit on it. In my current run Benjamin is even winning more than half the games at knight odds from Dragon 2 at 3' + 2", but that's with just one thread for each. If we define the goal for the human to be able to actually win a majority of the games played (not just win more than lose) at the 15' + 10" Rapid TC against whichever engine is best at this, which is essentially Armageddon knight odds, then I believe the minimum FIDE rating needed now is somewhere in the 2400 to 2500 range. GM David Smerdon beat Komodo (pre-Dragon) by 5 wins to 1 at that tc last year, and he's just over 2500. Probably Dragon has improved enough to make this something like 4 to 2 or perhaps 3 to 2 with a draw in his favor if we replay the match now. The games with Benjamin suggest that even one thread Dragon needs a 2500 opponent for this, but I don't think that's close to the truth for a human opponent. But we'll just have to schedule a human match to find out the answer.

So in order to get an estimate of how many threads todays most current Komodo needs to equal the version of Komodo that played versus Smerdon with x amount of threads, and maybe you could determine how many threads is needed with the most current Komodo to beat Smerdon at 10'+5" . So if you figure that the current Komodo only needs 8 threads to be equal to the version that played versus Smerdon with 32 threads, then you can get an estimate of what TC is also needed to beat Smerdon

Well, the improvement in Komodo since the Smerdon match is about 200 elo in blitz on four threads, maybe 150 elo in Rapid, a bit less on 32 threads. Still I think Dragon 2 on four threads is stronger than pre-Dragon Komodo on 32. But anyway we lost by 280 elo (giant error bars though on only five games), so something like 150 elo loss is a good guess. That's why I estimate a 4 to 2 loss now at 15' + 10", which probably means an even result at 10' + 5" or so. But we have learned a few things since then that might help a bit, especially to force Dragon to pretend it has half or less the given time so as to reduce the human's ponder time.