The end of Standard Chess for Top Engines ?

[Chessqueen]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

[Jouni]

Correction: fastest CPU is AMD Ryzen™ Threadripper™ PRO 5995WX.

[supersharp77]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

Nope......opening Book shoud be cut off after...lets say....8-9 or 10 opening moves.....Most of these engines play pretty smart without an opening book anyway...

[Chessqueen]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

Nope......opening Book shoud be cut off after...lets say....8-9 or 10 opening moves.....Most of these engines play pretty smart without an opening book anyway...

I truly believe that if you give the top 2 engines ( Stockfish and Dragon ) a very short Opening Book of only 4 to 5 Opening moves they will create better variations than any human has created so far https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

[lkaufman]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

Nope......opening Book shoud be cut off after...lets say....8-9 or 10 opening moves.....Most of these engines play pretty smart without an opening book anyway...

I truly believe that if you give the top 2 engines ( Stockfish and Dragon ) a very short Opening Book of only 4 to 5 Opening moves they will create better variations than any human has created so far https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

We’ll, the top human players already use top
Engines to prepare their openings, so this isn’t plausible, unless you meant “created prior to 2020” or so.

[Chessqueen]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

Nope......opening Book shoud be cut off after...lets say....8-9 or 10 opening moves.....Most of these engines play pretty smart without an opening book anyway...

I truly believe that if you give the top 2 engines ( Stockfish and Dragon ) a very short Opening Book of only 4 to 5 Opening moves they will create better variations than any human has created so far https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

We’ll, the top human players already use top
Engines to prepare their openings, so this isn’t plausible, unless you meant “created prior to 2020” or so.

Therefore, this Sinquefield 20 Ply Openings is better than 8-9 or 10 Opening moves as Supersharp77 stated

[Chessqueen]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

Nope......opening Book shoud be cut off after...lets say....8-9 or 10 opening moves.....Most of these engines play pretty smart without an opening book anyway...

As I stated before With good Opening and super strong hardware the Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws, Except in TCEC where they use stupid unbalanced Openings, this is probably why we need Chess324 ==> https://www.chess.com/computer-chess-championship

[towforce]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws...

I have no evidence, but my intuition is that there might be a way to beat today's top engines at standard chess: play for complex positions. Complex positions would offer two advantages:

1. throttle search depth by increasing the branching factor

2. weaken the value of knowledge because the position is so tactical


I am assuming, of course, that it's possible to:

a) find moves that lead to positions becoming complicated with a large number of lines the opponent will be obliged to investigate

b) outplay top chess programs in these positions

I could be wrong about all this: the evidence isn't strong for any of it except that I have seen search depth get throttled by complex positions on older computers (it has been many years since I seriously investigated this). I would be genuinely interested in what other people think.

[Chessqueen]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws...

I have no evidence, but my intuition is that there might be a way to beat today's top engines at standard chess: play for complex positions. Complex positions would offer two advantages:

1. throttle search depth by increasing the branching factor

2. weaken the value of knowledge because the position is so tactical


I am assuming, of course, that it's possible to:

a) find moves that lead to positions becoming complicated with a large number of lines the opponent will be obliged to investigate

b) outplay top chess programs in these positions

I could be wrong about all this: the evidence isn't strong for any of it except that I have seen search depth get throttled by complex positions on older computers (it has been many years since I seriously investigated this). I would be genuinely interested in what other people think.

What I am getting at is that Standard chess very soon will be solved probably in the next 5 years where the top 2 engines will draw 1000 games as long as the Opening is balanced and NOT tweaked in favor of one side like in TCEC

[BrendanJNorman]

With good Opening and super strong hardware The Top 2 engines are telling us that Standard Chess is reaching the point where most games end up in Draws...

I have no evidence, but my intuition is that there might be a way to beat today's top engines at standard chess: play for complex positions. Complex positions would offer two advantages:

1. throttle search depth by increasing the branching factor

2. weaken the value of knowledge because the position is so tactical


I am assuming, of course, that it's possible to:

a) find moves that lead to positions becoming complicated with a large number of lines the opponent will be obliged to investigate

b) outplay top chess programs in these positions

I could be wrong about all this: the evidence isn't strong for any of it except that I have seen search depth get throttled by complex positions on older computers (it has been many years since I seriously investigated this). I would be genuinely interested in what other people think.

What I am getting at is that Standard chess very soon will be solved probably in the next 5 years where the top 2 engines will draw 1000 games as long as the Opening is balanced and NOT tweaked in favor of one side like in TCEC

Just because two engines draw 100% of games, this doesn't mean chess is "solved".

It means the next Fruit/Rybka/Ippolit/Stockfish/AlphaZero/Lc0 hasn't come along yet to shake the game up.

And it *will* happen. Always does.