Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ?

[Chessqueen]

Draughts is more difficult than chess
What is more difficult, draughts or chess? One can argue endlessly about this question according to the ex-world champion Dr. Max Eu...

It is often thought that chess is harder than checkers. Nothing is less true. The very simplicity of the game makes draughts so difficult. A chess player must calculate various possibilities at once before he moves. Draughts players are forced to think ahead. We know from Ton Sijbrands that he thought forward 35 moves during a party. While his board was full of pieces, he came calculating to a position in which he had three stones and his opponent only two. Because it would finish in a draw, he decided to make a different move .


Is blind chess not more difficult than blind draughts? Players who have studied and played both games do not say no, because although the number of pieces in chess is higher, they have clear distinguishing marks which help memory, an element missing from draughts . To the question whether draughts is harder than chess or bridge master Jack de Haas once extensively responded:

"Checkers is at least as difficult as chess and the combinations in checkers, thanks to the compulsory capture and the capture of the majority of the pieces, are brighter and deeper than in chess.

GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 10 years is only ranked 1089 in the World Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 10 years ==>

Which is more difficult read here ==> https://historyofdraughts.blogspot.com/ ... chess.html

[Guenther]

Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts.

International Draughts (10x10) is not as complicated as Chess, although the board has 100 squares only 50 are used. The pieces are also very short ranged, more like a pawn in chess, which decreases the number of possibilities enormously.

During the last Unofficial World championship for International Draughts programs just 1 of the 84 games between the 7 top programs was decisive (which could very well be due to a bug), 83 games were drawn. The ranking was mainly determined by the score against weaker programs, these programs occasionally play a bad move, and than it is more or less a question of luck.

https://www.uwccpi2021.draughtsprograms ... usion.html

I'm pretty sure that International Draughts is a theoretically drawn game, but actually proving it is not so easy.

[unmarked quote]One can argue endlessly...
quack...[/unmarked quote]

Why not quote the full internet on everything now (w/o even giving the source)?
http://historyofdraughts.blogspot.com/2 ... chess.html
May be talkchess, or your 'brain' will finally implode.

[mvanthoor]

I also believe that unlike chess there is no money in draughts and I wonder how much money the best draught player earn from playing.

I also believe there's no money in chess to live off, if you're outside the top 50 of the world, just as in darts. You'll have to do things on the side such as teach, write books, or have successful youtube channel.

Look at the PDC order of merits

It ranks players on the basis of how much prize money someone won in the last two years. (If I remember correctly, the prize money won in January 2020 will drop off the list in January 2022, so your merit decreases if you don't play/win any tournaments.)

If we take Dutch "modaal inkomen" (the default income the Dutch government uses to do tax calculations and predictions, and which gives you an average standard of living in the Netherlands), which is €40.000 gross in 2021, that would be 34.000 GBP. In two years that'd be 68.000 GBP, for a fairly average living standard. You can see on the order of merit that you start dropping below that figure as soon as you're no longer in the top 50 of the world, which would mean that, if you made your entire income from playing darts tournaments only, you'd start falling below an average living standard.

I would imagine that chess is not much different.

[Joost Buijs]

Chess
In May 1997 an IBM supercomputer known as Deep Blue beat then chess world champion Garry Kasparov, who had once bragged that he would never lose to a machine. The computer beat Kasparov by 3½-2½ in a famous six-game match after the first match in 1996 was won by Kasparov (4-2). In 2006 the chess program Deep Fritz beat world champion Vladimir Kramnik by 4-2.

Draughts on the 100-square board:
From April 9 to 14 2012 a Man-Machine battle in international draughts took place in Heerhugowaard, Holland, as a side event to the Dutch National championship in international draughts. A match with triple world champion Alexander Schwarzman, from Russia on one side of the board and Maximus , a computer draughts program from The Netherlands on the other side. Schwarzman won the match with 7-5 (one win and five draws). Still now there is no program that can beat the world champion of draughts on a 100-square board.

You make 2 mistakes here, first of all Draughts is actually played on a 50 square board, secondly the level of Draughts programs in 2012 wasn't very high, maybe comparable in complexity to chess programs with 2500 CCRL rating. Even today are top level Draughts programs relatively simple and way less advanced than top level Chess engines.

The main reason is that there is hardly any development going on in computer Draughts. If you look at the computer Draughts forum there are just a few posts per year, sometimes several months are passing by without a single message.

[Joost Buijs]

B.T.W. I'm pretty sure that Alexander Schwarzman won't win a single game in a match against the current crop of Draughts programs, maybe he is able to draw all games due to the high drawing tendency of Draughts, but that would be it.

[Chessqueen]

Chess
In May 1997 an IBM supercomputer known as Deep Blue beat then chess world champion Garry Kasparov, who had once bragged that he would never lose to a machine. The computer beat Kasparov by 3½-2½ in a famous six-game match after the first match in 1996 was won by Kasparov (4-2). In 2006 the chess program Deep Fritz beat world champion Vladimir Kramnik by 4-2.

Draughts on the 100-square board:
From April 9 to 14 2012 a Man-Machine battle in international draughts took place in Heerhugowaard, Holland, as a side event to the Dutch National championship in international draughts. A match with triple world champion Alexander Schwarzman, from Russia on one side of the board and Maximus , a computer draughts program from The Netherlands on the other side. Schwarzman won the match with 7-5 (one win and five draws). Still now there is no program that can beat the world champion of draughts on a 100-square board.

You make 2 mistakes here, first of all Draughts is actually played on a 50 square board, secondly the level of Draughts programs in 2012 wasn't very high, maybe comparable in complexity to chess programs with 2500 CCRL rating. Even today are top level Draughts programs relatively simple and way less advanced than top level Chess engines.

The main reason is that there is hardly any development going on in computer Draughts. If you look at the computer Draughts forum there are just a few posts per year, sometimes several months are passing by without a single message.

Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached Master after studying chess for 8 years ==>

Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.

Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”

[Guenther]

Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>

Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.

Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”

Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Jost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unkown reason in the programmers forum.

[Chessqueen]

Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>

Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.

Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”

Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games also in Chess, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Just has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.

Ouch, you are NOT an authority to give a professional opinion about complexity, that is why I got statements from Dr. Max Euwe and Dr. Irving Chernev about the matter. Correct we are talking about chess programmers who could give a shot to solve Draughts which is still unsolved What more evidence you need Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached Master after studying chess for 8 years ==>

Note: This is what I wrote when I posted this " Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board."

[dangi12012]

Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts. Anyway here is an IM Chess player who just learned how to play Draughts ==>

Here is Eric Rosen Fide Ratings in Chess, but he is only rated over 1700 in Draughts ==> https://ratings.fide.com/profile/2032562

So that this doesnt derail into a discussion of chess vs draughts which you stated that you do not want.
Let me ask this:
Is there a draught engine in existence on github?
What is the known branching factor?

From a computer standpoint I can say that only 50 squares are used so a position would fit into 2 computer registers. Also with very simple rules so I guess only 2-3 instructions are needed per possible move so you could literally do trillions of moves/s on a gpu.

If its a 8x8 board its literally 32 squares with 24 pieces. That sounds infinitely more solvable especially since a gpu is a 32 bit machine.

That leaves retrograde analysis starting from 0 pieces and building a tablebase until you arrive at 40 man tablebase. I think in chess the tablebase uses less than 1 bit per position on average.

[Chessqueen]

Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts. Anyway here is an IM Chess player who just learned how to play Draughts ==>

Here is Eric Rosen Fide Ratings in Chess, but he is only rated over 1700 in Draughts ==> https://ratings.fide.com/profile/2032562

So that this doesnt derail into a discussion of chess vs draughts which you stated that you do not want.
Let me ask this:
Is there a draught engine in existence on github?
What is the known branching factor?

From a computer standpoint I can say that only 50 squares are used so a position would fit into 2 computer registers. Also with very simple rules so I guess only 2-3 instructions are needed per possible move so you could literally do trillions of moves/s on a gpu.

If its a 8x8 board its literally 32 squares with 24 pieces. That sounds infinitely more solvable especially since a gpu is a 32 bit machine.

That leaves retrograde analysis starting from 0 pieces and building a tablebase until you arrive at 40 man tablebase. I think in chess the tablebase uses less than 1 bit per position on average.

Kingsrow and this program are available, but I do not see them on github https://hjetten.home.xs4all.nl/scan/scan.html
https://github.com/eygilbert/egdb_intl