Most interesting FRC opening from last TCEC FRC 5 tournament final.

[Lazy_Frank]

It is opening 24 (games 47 and 48 respectively):

https://tcec-chess.com/#div=frc5f&game=47&season=22
https://tcec-chess.com/#div=frc5f&game=48&season=22

Both games went white win.

After some analysis here is mine line:

1. b3 {B} d6 {B}
2. e4 {B} b5 {B, sideline e6}
3. Nc3 {B} Bc6 {B, sidelines b4,a6}
4. d4 {B, sideline f4} g6 {B, sideline b4}
5. f3 {B} Bg7 {B}

For comparison all three games at ply 11:

Leela - Stockfish :

[fen]brnnkb1r/p1p2qpp/3ppp2/1p6/3PP3/1P1N1P2/P1P3PP/BR1NKBQR w KQkq - 2 6 [/fen]

Stockfish - Leela :

[fen]brnn1bqr/p1pkp1pp/3p4/3N1p2/1p2P3/1P3P2/P1PP2PP/BRN1KBQR w KQ f6 0 6 [/fen]

Book line :

[fen]1rnnk1qr/p1p1ppbp/2bp2p1/1p6/3PP3/1PN2P2/P1P3PP/BRN1KBQR w KQkq - 1 6 [/fen]

Quite a difference.

[Modern Times]

They use a book for FRC ?

[Lazy_Frank]

Yes, book was used for FRC 4 final and FRC 5.
Just 2 plies, but actually very semi-busted ones.

[Modern Times]

Why on earth would they do that.

[Lazy_Frank]

Because without book FRC between top engines is dead, similar to standard chess start position.

[Modern Times]

Because without book FRC between top engines is dead, similar to standard chess start position.

OK, so - spectators find draws boring, they don't make any money from them, so they create artificial scenarios to attract an audience. An opening book with FRC is an abomination - they simply shouldn't bother. Fischer would be turning in his grave.

Double FRC though is a really interesting new idea, as long as there is no book and each side has reasonable chances, i.e. they aren't horribly unbalanced. That would really exercise a human mind, although I doubt we will ever see humans play it.

[Lazy_Frank]

Because without book FRC between top engines is dead, similar to standard chess start position.

OK, so - spectators find draws boring, they don't make any money from them, so they create artificial scenarios to attract an audience. An opening book with FRC is an abomination - they simply shouldn't bother. Fischer would be turning in his grave.

Double FRC though is a really interesting new idea, as long as there is no book and each side has reasonable chances, i.e. they aren't horribly unbalanced. That would really exercise a human mind, although I doubt we will ever see humans play it.

Fisher invented FRC to avoid humans home preparation in standard chess (mainly 3 variations - c4/d4/e4). And he was right, humans can't keep in mind all 960 openings theory even up to move 2.

With engines that not working ...

[Uri Blass]

Because without book FRC between top engines is dead, similar to standard chess start position.

I doubt it.

I see in CCRL 39-11 and 260 draws between stockfish 15 and Dragon3 in FRC with no books.

There are certainly more draws relative to weaker engines and I guess more draws at long time control but I doubt we have 100% draws even at long time control.

http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404FRC/cg ... ockfish_15

Stockfish15 is not the best in FRC and I guess the latest developement version is stronger in FRC based on the following test
https://tests.stockfishchess.org/tests/ ... 97a12d6caf

[RubiChess]

Because without book FRC between top engines is dead, similar to standard chess start position.

I doubt it.

I see in CCRL 39-11 and 260 draws between stockfish 15 and Dragon3 in FRC with no books.

There are certainly more draws relative to weaker engines and I guess more draws at long time control but I doubt we have 100% draws even at long time control.

CCRL at 40/2 and one thread is not TCEC at 30'+3" and >100 threads. And it doesn't need 100% draw to be dead.