30 min - 1800 sec - for (Naka) vs 4 sec (Komodo) per game then?? It's getting late...but I think that's roughly 500 to 1. That doesn't sound right.lkaufman wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 4:03 amWell, someone on the Stockfish team calculated that for a fair match between latest Stockfish on a good quad vs. Magnus the time odds needed for a fair match (without ponder by SF) would be a ratio of a thousand to one, which means about 500 to 1 for Komodo vs Magnus (or Naka, not much difference in blitz). You can reduce that a lot by giving the human White every game and draw odds, and by a 1 core limit, and by an opening book limit (or none at all). We did one match that way, I'd be fine with doing another. Or Naka could just play Komodo level 24, which is roughly like playing it with game in three seconds.Cornfed wrote: ↑Tue May 19, 2020 3:54 am "Odds" is little more than theater for those who might like weird spectacles. My opinion of course.
"Time odds" - now that is the only thing of interest to me because both sides are at least playing the 'same game' with the 'same pieces'...only the machine will always think (?? okay, calculate) faster so 'time needs to be the attempted equalizer'. Not material which changes the game on the board. Why not just not allow the computer to put a single piece/pawn on its 3rd rank...think of the oddities - the human could try to use that to his advantage at various parts of the game. But, again, a gimick.
A Nakamura match of say 15 min/5 sec delay to 2 min for Komodo (pick your difference...depends largely on processor(s) speed at the point), now that would be interesting as both sides are truly playing the same game on the board.
But...at least is the same game with the same number of pieces.