Zenmastur vs Ovyron No it's not another GROB!

[Zenmastur]

Well, at least you think I'm crazy and not a liar. I was crazy about guaranteeing a draw with 1.g4, so unfortunately I can't count my chickens before they hatch.

My pace on this game has been slow because of the other 16 games that I'm playing, once I catch up with all I'm planning to start turning my predictions into conditionals (after all, I have to commit to a line in advance to predict your moves, so I could just as well pre-move them.)

I've been keeping myself busy with KGA analysis in other lines, so I'm good with any pace you choose.

I did pre-analysis on about 100 minor lines. Few are even playable. I'm still working on the 3.Bc4 line. I'm not impressed with it so far and I've done all the major lines in it. It seems that black can maintain an advantage right to the very end. I'm sure you could draw with it but I see no good reason to play it since white will always be worse. I haven't found a single critical line where white can claim equality.

You said this:

I have 3.Bc4 as best here with a mainline that goes into the 40s moves... then again I always looked at these positions with the mindset that white would be lucky to escape with a draw...

I haven't seen a single line yet that white can force the evaluation to 0.00. Even some of the “less than stellar” black responses seem to maintain an advantage.

Regards,

Zenmastur

[Ovyron]

You give too much credit to engine's evals, there's more to life than Stockfish giving a positive eval or a negative eval to the variations. Back in my day we'd call people that played the top scored move of the engine every time an "engine monkey", I won games, and was defeated by moves that engines never considered best, no matter what analysis method was used.

"Score fudging" is a critical ability to have for success, you see how the variations go and if you like them for white you add your own score to them, if you like them for black you subtract your score from them. So if your score is 0.30 and the engine's score is -0.20 it totals 0.10 and that means a white's edge. You don't just explore the lines and hope that one day the engine will show a positive eval.

That's why creating a book for an opening with the most relevant lines wouldn't work, you end up with the ones that the engine likes the best, but we know how stupid engines are, so instead of "I wasn't able to find any variation better for white", you'd have to say "I wasn't able to find any variation where Stockfish showed a positive eval for white", which could be the engine's fault if it doesn't understand the positions and likes black better.

Any claim that black has some advantage in the KGA would be given by an engine monkey that can't see past a negative eval by the engine.

[Zenmastur]

You give too much credit to engine's evals, there's more to life than Stockfish giving a positive eval or a negative eval to the variations. Back in my day we'd call people that played the top scored move of the engine every time an "engine monkey", I won games, and was defeated by moves that engines never considered best, no matter what analysis method was used.

"Score fudging" is a critical ability to have for success, you see how the variations go and if you like them for white you add your own score to them, if you like them for black you subtract your score from them. So if your score is 0.30 and the engine's score is -0.20 it totals 0.10 and that means a white's edge. You don't just explore the lines and hope that one day the engine will show a positive eval.

That's why creating a book for an opening with the most relevant lines wouldn't work, you end up with the ones that the engine likes the best, but we know how stupid engines are, so instead of "I wasn't able to find any variation better for white", you'd have to say "I wasn't able to find any variation where Stockfish showed a positive eval for white", which could be the engine's fault if it doesn't understand the positions and likes black better.

Any claim that black has some advantage in the KGA would be given by an engine monkey that can't see past a negative eval by the engine.

I think your analysis is flawed. Not all evaluations are created equal! An evaluation made at the end of a 60-ply search from the root is much more accurate than one made at the end of a 30-ply search from the root. One made at the end of 100-ply search that has been reverse analyzed with multiPV 3 at ever single move in the search is more accurate than a 60-ply search from the root.

Everyone knows that the evaluations routines have shortcomings. The whole point of a search is to mitigate those shortcomings. Searching deeper is better. Doing multiPV searches are even better and using reverse analysis with MultiPV searches to great depth are better still. You can't do that with your hardware. It's too slow and doesn't have enough memory. You thought you could defend 1.g4. You were wrong! You will always run the risk of losing to someone that can out search you. You might be good at analyzing but you will never know what someone who can out search you has discovered until it's too late. Your lucky chess is a very drawish game. If it weren't so easy to draw you would be losing almost every game.

[Uri Blass]

The truth of the matter is that I've been playing at a level higher than Zenmastur's, as any sane person would pick the black's pieces here.

You're out of your mind. Playing better??? The position has been dead even since you blundered with 3. ... d6. You should be playing for a win by now. Instead you have a drawn position that you could very easily lose if you're not careful. How is that playing better?

I chose the KGA since you already told me you had a drawing line in the Spanish. There are tons of drawing lines in the Spanish so why would I walk into an opening when I know you have a prepared line. Much better that I take you out of your "book" and let you blunder play moves like 3. ... d6. Make another couple moves like that and see what happens!

The fact is I gave you a huge advantage by playing the King's Gambit and you couldn't maintain that advantage for even one move!

Regards,

Zenmastur

1)It is logical to decide not to play the spanish because you believe that black can easily get a draw but
not for the reason that the opponent told you that he has a drawing line.

2)I think that trusting the opponent is a bad idea and what he tell you should not be relevant for the choice of your moves(he may have a wrong opinion about the position because of some line that he did not analyze).

3)I believe that engines still are not close to solving chess so you cannot know if the position is a draw or not a draw.
You may have a basis to believe a position is a draw but you cannot be sure about it(0.00 evaluation by engines is not a proof that the position is a draw because it is possible that there is some line that they do not see deep enough).

4)I am surprised by your choice to play the king gambit if you believe black has the advantage by playing the right moves because I guess that there are ways to get practical chances with white against weak hardware with no risk.

There are many possible lines to play except the spanish and if you want something that is relatively not anlayzed then even
lines like 1.e4 e5 2.Ne2 or 1.e4 e5 2.d3 are possible and seems better.

I did not analyze them and maybe these specific lines are not good to get practical chances against weak hardware or black is better in them but you get the idea and the idea is that it is probably possible to find practical chances against weak hardware with a line with no risk.

[Uri Blass]

You give too much credit to engine's evals, there's more to life than Stockfish giving a positive eval or a negative eval to the variations. Back in my day we'd call people that played the top scored move of the engine every time an "engine monkey", I won games, and was defeated by moves that engines never considered best, no matter what analysis method was used.

"Score fudging" is a critical ability to have for success, you see how the variations go and if you like them for white you add your own score to them, if you like them for black you subtract your score from them. So if your score is 0.30 and the engine's score is -0.20 it totals 0.10 and that means a white's edge. You don't just explore the lines and hope that one day the engine will show a positive eval.

That's why creating a book for an opening with the most relevant lines wouldn't work, you end up with the ones that the engine likes the best, but we know how stupid engines are, so instead of "I wasn't able to find any variation better for white", you'd have to say "I wasn't able to find any variation where Stockfish showed a positive eval for white", which could be the engine's fault if it doesn't understand the positions and likes black better.

Any claim that black has some advantage in the KGA would be given by an engine monkey that can't see past a negative eval by the engine.

Do you claim that black has no advantage after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 and you can play it with white and draw against Zenmastur?

[Ovyron]

You will always run the risk of losing to someone that can out search you. You might be good at analyzing but you will never know what someone who can out search you has discovered until it's too late.

Yeah, too bad that "someone" isn't you, huh? So why can that "someone" out search me but you can't?

All you've talked about is pure theory about what you think someone can do or can't do in slower hardware. My hardware hasn't been stressed at all on this game, it's been a walk on the park.

[Ovyron]

Do you claim that black has no advantage after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 and you can play it with white and draw against Zenmastur?

Yes, even Zenmastur agrees.

Worth noting:

My claim is for 1.e4 e5 2.f4 exf4 3.Bc4, Zenmastur could beat me if I played 3.Nf3 and he played 3...g5. You could say "well, drawing with 3.Nf3 is something you'd be able to do with faster hardware", but a big part of being able to play like this is knowing what variations to avoid.

[Zenmastur]

The truth of the matter is that I've been playing at a level higher than Zenmastur's, as any sane person would pick the black's pieces here.

You're out of your mind. Playing better??? The position has been dead even since you blundered with 3. ... d6. You should be playing for a win by now. Instead you have a drawn position that you could very easily lose if you're not careful. How is that playing better?

I chose the KGA since you already told me you had a drawing line in the Spanish. There are tons of drawing lines in the Spanish so why would I walk into an opening when I know you have a prepared line. Much better that I take you out of your "book" and let you blunder play moves like 3. ... d6. Make another couple moves like that and see what happens!

The fact is I gave you a huge advantage by playing the King's Gambit and you couldn't maintain that advantage for even one move!

Regards,

Zenmastur

1)It is logical to decide not to play the spanish because you believe that black can easily get a draw but
not for the reason that the opponent told you that he has a drawing line.

2)I think that trusting the opponent is a bad idea and what he tell you should not be relevant for the choice of your moves(he may have a wrong opinion about the position because of some line that he did not analyze).

It's not like the drawing lines in the spanish are a well kept secret. I don't have any trouble believing he has a prepared line that could draw. He might, he might not, why should I play into it.

3)I believe that engines still are not close to solving chess so you cannot know if the position is a draw or not a draw.
You may have a basis to believe a position is a draw but you cannot be sure about it(0.00 evaluation by engines is not a proof that the position is a draw because it is possible that there is some line that they do not see deep enough).

I don't have to depend solely on the engine evaluation to determine if an endgame is a win or not (or a draw). When you get close enough for the search to reach table base positions and they begin to dominate the evaluation it "should" become clear if it's a draw or not. I'm searching deep enough to get to table base positions from the opening. So, I'm not worried about misjudging an endgame position or getting into an endgame that I didn't look at before it showed up on the board. I will have looked at all the likely endgames LONG before they can show up on the board. I was looking at possible endgame right after he played 3. ... d6.

In all honesty, I haven't even looked at the game other than to post my next move since I finished analysing my 4th move. I looked at some of the endgames then and haven't looked at them since.

4)I am surprised by your choice to play the king gambit if you believe black has the advantage by playing the right moves because I guess that there are ways to get practical chances with white against weak hardware with no risk.

I believe black should get a very good advantage out of the King's Gambit. He didn't want to play into those complex lines. He gave up ALL of the advantages he gained by taking the pawn on the very next move. If he plays the best moves he can't search deep enough to "know" they are the best move(s) and ends up in a MASSIVELY complex position where he can lose to one big search that exposes any error he makes.

There are many possible lines to play except the spanish and if you want something that is relatively not anlayzed then even
lines like 1.e4 e5 2.Ne2 or 1.e4 e5 2.d3 are possible and seems better.

From a practical point of view I would have liked an open sicilian. There is little to no risk for white AND it's complex enough and needs deep searching, but he declined my offer. Lines like 2.Ne2 gives up the advantage without offering any additional complexity. They aren't as bad as the King's Gambit, but they aren't very complex either.

[Zenmastur]

Do you claim that black has no advantage after 1.e4 e5 2.f4 and you can play it with white and draw against Zenmastur?

Yes, even Zenmastur agrees.

Wrong! I agree to nothing of the sort.

Don't even think about putting words in my mouth that I didn't speak!.

[Ovyron]

Wrong! I agree to nothing of the sort.

Don't even think about putting words in my mouth that I didn't speak!.

You said:

I'm sure you could draw with it but I see no good reason to play it since white will always be worse.

You were saying you were sure I could draw with it, so I'd draw you in a KGA with reversed colors by using it.