Amazing results of LeelaKnightOdds-Dev

[Uri Blass]

I feel a bit exhausted, I've been trying to play with LeelaQueenOdds but it seems the computer doesn't want anything to do with me. He refuses to play. Only accept some encounters. To all, I wish you a happy night and day and above all, the best.

All the games of all the LeelaOdds bots are played on a single computer with just one GPU. In order to prevent it from crashing, there is currently a limit of four games at once for queen odds, three for knight odds, two for rook odds, and two for queen for knight. If a bot refuses to play with you, it normally means that already the limit (4 games at once for queen odds) has been reached. Normally you won't have to wait long until one of the four games ends. So not only is the bot giving queen odds to strong players and moving in about a tenth of a second per move, it is sometimes playing ten games at once at various odds, all on one GPU, and scoring around 80% at queen odds, much more at lesser odds!

This is perhaps the most amazing thing I have seen in my long life, not only in the chess world but in general. It is about as incredible as finding intelligent space aliens among us, or bringing dinosaurs back to life, or almost anything from science fiction. I think it gives us a peak at the future, when bots will seem like gods to us, all-knowing and all-powerful. Frightening, but at least we chess players get more warning than most people.

4+3+2+2=11 so it seems the maximal number of games at the same time is 11.
It seems that for some reason players choose to play in time control when they lose most games(and most of the games are not 15+10 time control)

[lkaufman]

I feel a bit exhausted, I've been trying to play with LeelaQueenOdds but it seems the computer doesn't want anything to do with me. He refuses to play. Only accept some encounters. To all, I wish you a happy night and day and above all, the best.

All the games of all the LeelaOdds bots are played on a single computer with just one GPU. In order to prevent it from crashing, there is currently a limit of four games at once for queen odds, three for knight odds, two for rook odds, and two for queen for knight. If a bot refuses to play with you, it normally means that already the limit (4 games at once for queen odds) has been reached. Normally you won't have to wait long until one of the four games ends. So not only is the bot giving queen odds to strong players and moving in about a tenth of a second per move, it is sometimes playing ten games at once at various odds, all on one GPU, and scoring around 80% at queen odds, much more at lesser odds!

This is perhaps the most amazing thing I have seen in my long life, not only in the chess world but in general. It is about as incredible as finding intelligent space aliens among us, or bringing dinosaurs back to life, or almost anything from science fiction. I think it gives us a peak at the future, when bots will seem like gods to us, all-knowing and all-powerful. Frightening, but at least we chess players get more warning than most people.

4+3+2+2=11 so it seems the maximal number of games at the same time is 11.
It seems that for some reason players choose to play in time control when they lose most games(and most of the games are not 15+10 time control)

Yes, 11 is max, I wrote ten because I never saw all 11 playing at once. Your second sentence is correct, but of the top dozen on the Leaderboard, nine have been winning more than losing recently, including both you and I, so I think it shows that we are likely doing the right thing in choosing time limits where we can generally play to win rather than play to draw. Players have different motivations, some may choose time limits at which they want to improve their results in standard chess, for example.

[Uri Blass]

Something is clearly wrong with the bot and it seems not to use the opponent time.

https://lichess.org/Zz9FRZ3J#163

What is wrong with 82...e5 when the opponent has only 2.4 seconds on the clock in 1+0 game instead of allowing a draw with the 50 move rule?
The excuse of not knowing who is the opponent is not convincing.
Even if you assume that you play against a strong GM I believe 82...e5 is winning when the strong GM has only 2.4 seconds to finish the game.

You are correct that the bot does not take into consideration how much time the opponent has. In principle that should help, but it is not simple to use this information and other things have higher priority now. Simply reducing draws in general is much more important, and has already been done for the queenforknight bot. The goal has been to win matches against "fair" opponents, not to run up the score by avoiding draws against weaker than fair opponents, but now clearly most opponents of all bots are much below "fair".

I think that maybe you need some leaderboard tables:
one for bullet time control,one for blitz time control and one for rapid time control.

Well, I like to find a relationship between time control and game strength, however drawing in quick tc is much easier than win in slower tc, players like "Catecan" or "Brunetticus" seem to do just that, so maybe I should add an arbitrary rule, like halve 'K' for all draws?

All draws have 'K' halved now, play for the win!
Other changes: K=40 for the first 30 games, K = 20 up to 150 games, K=10 for subsequent games

Hello, I would like to say that I have been enjoying the odds bots, and I think the queenoddsbot leader board was a good idea. Acknowledging that we should view the leader board as in an open beta subject to change. Nonetheless it seems you inadvertently caused some sour feelings with this change. Whether or not it was a good change or not I don't actually think was the issue. I think it was that unlike the previous rating updates this one changed the relative rankings of the players. I have a simple compromise that will hopefully alleviate this. Add a Grandfather clause to the new k factor so they only apply to games played after the rating system changed. Given enough time and active participation it will all equalize to how you want it without robbing players of there 'earned' rating and let us return to focusing on having fun and exploring the strong play from these bots.

cbash thank you very much for the message.
I had decided not to play anymore or write more in this post. It was thanks to a friend, that I am here again. He told me and advised me to continue playing and having fun, that those titles were not what was truly important. Also, last night I felt a little sad, because I thought that I might have committed myself, causing mortification to Uri and Mr. Larry Kaufman, and that it would be better to give them the joy of knowing that I am still playing and learning from the bots and of all of you. Thanks again everyone. To tell the truth, I know that there is great work behind all this technological development and artificial intelligence, and it is precisely to that chain that has participated throughout history and created the possibility of playing against machines, who deserve the first prize. Thank you.

Thank you for pointing that out. I’m sorry if halving 'K' for the draws came across as an unfair decision. Over the past few days, many factors on this leaderboard have been adjusted multiple times. Personally, I find the data from your games against the bot very insightful for understanding how time control impacts overall strength and the strategies adopted by his players as well.
I’m not in a position to decide what’s fair or not—we should focus on simply enjoying the challenge of playing the bot. No offense is intended by what the leaderboard reflect. That said, I want to give special recognition to 'Father' climbing through the rankings despite everithing, managing to draw against such a strong bot in 1+0. Truly remarkable!

Marcus91, thanks for the message. I would believe that the important thing is to build bridges instead of dividing with walls. If you watch the games by the minute, you will find many mistakes on my part, given the relentless force of the Bot. But still, you will be able to observe a true mental dialogue between the Bot and my mind, for example, along the way I have been able to understand the tendency and brand of the Bot's learning, which creates paths on the part of the cybernetic mind and my mind. It's new for me. This is something incredible, and in games with long time controls there would not be enough time to do it, since there would be very few games and it would require a lot of investment of energy and time. For me it is easier to face a computer in classic controls, or with increased time per move, but it bores me, I consider that I learn more from the repeated bullet samples of "error hit error construction". Later, if you want, I could play with more extensive time controls, then the conclusive bullet guidelines would be implemented there. I find the strength and power of LeelaQueenOdds fantastic and at times it frustrates me. It is easier for me to face a computer with all the chips on the computer's side than to face LeelaQueenOdds in quick games. Machines for me were previously very predictable, for example in the first decade of the 21st century, I had the pleasure of playing repeatedly against a multiprocessor computer that ran at 200,000 kilondops per second at 60 minutes plus 15 seconds per play. That one, an anaconda, LeelaQueenOdds, a swarm of wasps. I will fight for a position on all tables if there are any and against standard computers. The machines overwhelm us, but not yet completely.

I do not know what you learn from bullet games.
I prefer longer time control and trying to win the bot.
Later I can analyze the games and find the mistakes that I do and learn from them.

I do not understand how playing for a draw at bullet time control can help to play later for a win against the bot when you will play longer time control.

Note that I tried many bullet games against the queen for knight bot and tried to put my pawns in white squares in the same way that you did in games but could not avoid losing at bullet and feel that I learn nothing from it(of course I blundered but at longer time control I can usually avoid the blunders and understanding the type of blunders that I make at bullet does not seem to help me to avoid them in bullet).

[Uri Blass]

a question about the calculation.

Suppose a player with rating 2450 beat LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference) that has a rating of 2027.3

Do you calculate the game as 400 elo difference or as more than it.

400 elo difference is going to be unfair and I guess that in this case people can get also rating of 4000 assuming they play enough games.

I also believe that it is clearly easier to achieve high rating if you play against LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference)

I lead against her 4.5-0.5 and it seems to me that it may be easier for me to get high performance against 15+10(Reference) and not against 1+0 Reference and I doubt if i can draw often enough for that purpose.

[Uri Blass]

rating list
nn1133 was the leader but it seems he did not play after the update.

1 Master_Unknown 2463.3 38
2 Orichess88 2451.8 35
LeelaQueenOdds as white 3+2 (Reference) 2450.0
3 Ushkothebear 2441.9 144
4 Omnivor 2406.8 30
LeelaQueenOdds as white 5+3 (Reference) 2353.7
LeelaQueenOdds as black 3+2 (Reference) 2350.0
5 Catecan 2288.2 831
6 Respectful_Dave 2256.9 68
LeelaQueenOdds as black 5+3 (Reference) 2253.7
7 Hissha 2236.0 70
LeelaQueenOdds as white 10+5 (Reference) 2220.3
8 uriblass 2213.2 141
9 Ajktulm 2210.6 199
10 iWannaSeeYouSmile 2209.8 73
11 AxelBoldt 2208.4 181
12 lyxsgdzt 2179.1 49
13 wael96 2171.0 53
14 TheLlamaLord 2153.7 22
15 nn1133 2152.3 6167

[Marcus91]

a question about the calculation.

Suppose a player with rating 2450 beat LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference) that has a rating of 2027.3

Do you calculate the game as 400 elo difference or as more than it.

400 elo difference is going to be unfair and I guess that in this case people can get also rating of 4000 assuming they play enough games.

I also believe that it is clearly easier to achieve high rating if you play against LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference)

I lead against her 4.5-0.5 and it seems to me that it may be easier for me to get high performance against 15+10(Reference) and not against 1+0 Reference and I doubt if i can draw often enough for that purpose.

The calculation does not include the 400 elo point rule as a limit, If the opponent is under 400 points you will continue to earn less and less as you continue to climb. Your strategy is legit, as is any other strategy to beat the leaderboard. From a subjective point of view, you are about to reach the 150 games threshold, which would bring you to have 'K=10', an opponent with much lower rating would make you climb very slowly, To reach the top of the leaderboard you would still need to win almost every time, and here the draw rule counts for little

[Uri Blass]

a question about the calculation.

Suppose a player with rating 2450 beat LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference) that has a rating of 2027.3

Do you calculate the game as 400 elo difference or as more than it.

400 elo difference is going to be unfair and I guess that in this case people can get also rating of 4000 assuming they play enough games.

I also believe that it is clearly easier to achieve high rating if you play against LeelaQueenOdds as black 15+10 (Reference)

I lead against her 4.5-0.5 and it seems to me that it may be easier for me to get high performance against 15+10(Reference) and not against 1+0 Reference and I doubt if i can draw often enough for that purpose.

The calculation does not include the 400 elo point rule as a limit, If the opponent is under 400 points you will continue to earn less and less as you continue to climb. Your strategy is legit, as is any other strategy to beat the leaderboard. From a subjective point of view, you are about to reach the 150 games threshold, which would bring you to have 'K=10', an opponent with much lower rating would make you climb very slowly, To reach the top of the leaderboard you would still need to win almost every time, and here the draw rule counts for little

I think that if I win 10 games in a row I will try higher level.

I have now 5.5-0.5 with 5 wins in a row and decided not to play the same opening again and again so it is not because of memorizing openings.
I use the suggestions of fide master Ori that is number 2 in the list(the suggestions are for black but they are also good for white).
You need
1)Pay attention to the opening
2)Control the Centre easily
3)Try to exchange pieces and attack.

You do not need to play too defensive and expect that the game is going to win itself because it is not going to happen.
The main thing to pay attention to it is not to blunder pieces.

It is also better to avoid from intuition like there is no way that this attack is not winning after this sacrifice and try to calculate to see that at least you keep a winning position that is easy to win even if the opponent can defend.

Maybe there are people who believe the opponent too much and think if the opponent has some initiative for a pawn it is better not to capture it.

In my last game I captured pawns of Leela with no fear when of course I was careful to calculate and did not capture without thinking and convincing myself that the opponent has no dengerous threats that I cannot defend against them.

https://lichess.org/hpPW4miEMtAN

First came 10.Qxh7 Later 11.Bxh6 that I calculated to be sure it force trading pieces with no risk for me.
Then 13.Qxf6 that I also calculated to cause no problems for me.
Then 15.d5 to block the bishop and control the centre.
I saw that 21.Bc4 lose the pawn g2 but it is a good deal to trade rooks for it and also losing d5 is a good deal to trade at d5.

[Father]

I feel a bit exhausted, I've been trying to play with LeelaQueenOdds but it seems the computer doesn't want anything to do with me. He refuses to play. Only accept some encounters. To all, I wish you a happy night and day and above all, the best.

All the games of all the LeelaOdds bots are played on a single computer with just one GPU. In order to prevent it from crashing, there is currently a limit of four games at once for queen odds, three for knight odds, two for rook odds, and two for queen for knight. If a bot refuses to play with you, it normally means that already the limit (4 games at once for queen odds) has been reached. Normally you won't have to wait long until one of the four games ends. So not only is the bot giving queen odds to strong players and moving in about a tenth of a second per move, it is sometimes playing ten games at once at various odds, all on one GPU, and scoring around 80% at queen odds, much more at lesser odds!

This is perhaps the most amazing thing I have seen in my long life, not only in the chess world but in general. It is about as incredible as finding intelligent space aliens among us, or bringing dinosaurs back to life, or almost anything from science fiction. I think it gives us a peak at the future, when bots will seem like gods to us, all-knowing and all-powerful. Frightening, but at least we chess players get more warning than most people.

4+3+2+2=11 so it seems the maximal number of games at the same time is 11.
It seems that for some reason players choose to play in time control when they lose most games(and most of the games are not 15+10 time control)

Yes, 11 is max, I wrote ten because I never saw all 11 playing at once. Your second sentence is correct, but of the top dozen on the Leaderboard, nine have been winning more than losing recently, including both you and I, so I think it shows that we are likely doing the right thing in choosing time limits where we can generally play to win rather than play to draw. Players have different motivations, some may choose time limits at which they want to improve their results in standard chess, for example.

All against Father.
Each challenge I prepared for the fight that occurred in silence in the streets at the corner of the park, almost nightfall, hitting each other without using boxing gloves, with bare hands, punching the jaw. to the chin, stomach and hydride. The machine against Father without mercy the machine using new instructions given from his corner, who studies Father to the point of satiety... Father seems exhausted, the count comes, Father gets up, and suddenly hits a straight shot to the kidney, he doubles up LeeelaQueenOdds and after more than 160 blows in just one minute she falls drowned and mad to the canvas. Father laughs evilly, goes to the corner and drinks a cold soda with a piece of bread.




[pgn] [Event "Casual bullet game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/PgsphI9s"]
[Date "2024.11.24"]
[White "LeelaQueenOdds"]
[Black "Catecan"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[UTCDate "2024.11.24"]
[UTCTime "21:55:50"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[BlackElo "2030"]
[WhiteTitle "BOT"]
[Variant "From Position"]
[TimeControl "60+0"]
[ECO "?"]
[Opening "?"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNB1KBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]

1. b3 d5 2. Bb2 e6 3. f4 c6 4. g4 f5 5. g5 Ne7 6. e3 Rg8 7. h4 g6 8. h5 Bg7 9. Nc3 Nd7 10. Nf3 Nf8 11. d4 b6 12. a4 a6 13. a5 b5 14. b4 Bb7 15. Ne2 Qc7 16. Nc1 Rc8 17. Nd3 Qb8 18. Be2 Qc7 19. Nc5 Qb8 20. O-O-O Qc7 21. Ne5 Qb8 22. Ned3 Qc7 23. Ne5 Qb8 24. Ned3 Qc7 25. Kb1 Qb8 26. Ne5 Qc7 27. Ned3 Qb8 28. Nb3 Qc7 29. Ndc5 Qb8 30. Nd3 Qc7 31. Ndc5 Qb8 32. Rh2 Qc7 33. Rdh1 Qb8 34. Nd3 Qc7 35. Nbc5 Qb8 36. Ne5 Qc7 37. Ned3 Qb8 38. Bc3 Qc7 39. Be1 Qb8 40. Bc3 Qc7 41. Be1 Qb8 42. Kb2 Qc7 43. Bc3 Qb8 44. Be1 Qc7 45. Ka2 Qb8 46. Bc3 Qc7 47. Be1 Qb8 48. Kb1 Qc7 49. Bc3 Qb8 50. Kb2 Qc7 51. Kb3 Qb8 52. Kb2 Qc7 53. Kb1 Qb8 54. Be1 Qc7 55. Rg2 Qb8 56. Kb2 Qc7 57. Kc1 Qb8 58. Kb1 Qc7 59. Bd1 Qb8 60. Rgh2 Qc7 61. Rh3 Qb8 62. c3 Qc7 63. Bg3 Qb8 64. Be1 Qc7 65. Bg3 Qb8 66. Ne1 Qc7 67. Nf3 Qb8 68. Ne1 Qc7 69. Nf3 Qb8 70. R3h2 Qc7 71. Ne1 Qb8 72. Ned3 Qc7 73. Kb2 Qb8 74. Kb1 Qc7 75. Ne1 Qb8 76. Nf3 Qc7 77. Kb2 Qb8 78. Kc2 Qc7 79. Ne1 Qb8 80. Ned3 Qc7 81. Bf3 Qb8 82. Bd1 Qc7 83. Bf3 Qb8 84. Rh3 Qc7 85. Be2 Qb8 86. Bd1 Qc7 87. Bf3 Qb8 88. Bd1 Qc7 89. Be2 Qb8 90. Bf3 Qc7 91. Bd1 Qb8 92. Be2 Qc7 93. Bf3 Qb8 94. R3h2 Qc7 95. Kd1 Qb8 96. Kc2 Qc7 97. Kb2 Qb8 98. Bd1 Qc7 99. Kc2 Qb8 100. Kd2 Qc7 101. Kc2 Qb8 102. Kb3 Qc7 103. Kb2 Qb8 104. Kc1 Qc7 105. Kd2 Qb8 106. Rg2 Qc7 107. Kc2 Qb8 108. Kc1 Qc7 109. Kb2 Qb8 110. Ka2 Qc7 111. Ne5 Qb8 112. hxg6 hxg6 113. Rgh2 Qc7 114. Ned3 Qb8 115. Ne5 Qc7 116. Ned3 Qb8 117. Kb3 Qc7 118. Kc2 Qb8 119. Kb3 Qc7 120. Kc2 Qb8 121. Ne5 Qc7 122. Kc1 Qb8 123. Kc2 Qc7 124. Nf3 Qb8 125. Kb2 Qc7 126. Kc2 Qb8 127. Kb2 Qc7 128. Kc1 Qb8 129. Kc2 Qc7 130. Kb2 Qb8 131. Kc2 Qc7 132. Kb2 Qb8 133. Rh3 Qc7 134. Ne1 Qb8 135. Nf3 Qc7 136. Ne1 Qb8 137. Ned3 Qc7 138. R3h2 Qb8 139. Ne5 Qc7 140. Ned3 Qb8 141. Kc2 Qc7 142. Kd2 Qb8 143. Kc2 Qc7 144. Kd2 Qb8 145. Kc1 Qc7 146. Rh3 Qb8 147. Kc2 Qc7 148. Kd2 Qb8 149. Kc1 Qc7 150. Kc2 Qb8 151. Kd2 Qc7 152. Kc1 Qb8 153. Kd2 Qc7 154. Kc2 Qb8 155. Kb2 Qc7 156. Ka2 Qb8 157. Ka3 Qc7 158. Kb2 Qb8 159. Kc2 Qc7 160. Kb2 Qb8 161. R3h2 Qc7 162. Ne5 Qb8 { The game is a draw. } 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

[Uri Blass]

It seems that it is not as easy as I thought.

I played 5 more games when I decided to play differnet first move 1.c4 1.c3 and 1.f4 and lost 4-1 against the bot at 15+10.
I went back to 1.e4 and won 2-1 later

part of my losses were loss on time in a winning position when I tried to calculate the win that was not simple did not like the move that I wanted to play and finally when I decided to play a move it was too late and I lost on time.

one loss was a checkmate when I saw the mating line before the losing mistake but thought maybe I have some defence and decided that I had not time to calculate and did not like to play at time trouble a line that I did not calculate that was better.

[Father]

It seems that it is not as easy as I thought.

I played 5 more games when I decided to play differnet first move 1.c4 1.c3 and 1.f4 and lost 4-1 against the bot at 15+10.
I went back to 1.e4 and won 2-1 later

part of my losses were loss on time in a winning position when I tried to calculate the win that was not simple did not like the move that I wanted to play and finally when I decided to play a move it was too late and I lost on time.

one loss was a checkmate when I saw the mating line before the losing mistake but thought maybe I have some defence and decided that I had not time to calculate and did not like to play at time trouble a line that I did not calculate that was better.

[pgn] [Event "Casual bullet game"]
[Site "https://lichess.org/MzuI1HRw"]
[Date "2024.11.26"]
[White "LeelaQueenOdds"]
[Black "Catecan"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[UTCDate "2024.11.26"]
[UTCTime "00:51:24"]
[WhiteElo "2000"]
[BlackElo "2030"]
[WhiteTitle "BOT"]
[Variant "From Position"]
[TimeControl "60+0"]
[ECO "?"]
[Opening "?"]
[Termination "Normal"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNB1KBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[SetUp "1"]
[Annotator "lichess.org"]

1. b3 d5 2. Bb2 e6 3. g4 c6 4. f4 f5 5. g5 Ne7 6. h4 Rg8 7. h5 g6 8. e3 Bg7 9. Nc3 Nd7 10. Nf3 Nf8 11. d4 b6 12. a4 a6 13. a5 b5 14. b4 Bb7 15. Ne2 Rc8 16. Nc1 Qc7 17. Nd3 Qb8 18. Be2 Qc7 19. Nc5 Qb8 20. O-O-O Qc7 21. Ne5 Qb8 22. Ned3 Qc7 23. Kb1 Qb8 24. Ne5 Qc7 25. Ned3 Qb8 26. Nb3 Qc7 27. Ndc5 Qb8 28. Nd3 Qc7 29. Ndc5 Qb8 30. Bd3 Qc7 31. Rh2 Qb8 32. Be2 Qc7 33. Rdh1 Qb8 34. Nd3 Qc7 35. Nbc5 Qb8 36. Ne5 Qc7 37. Ned3 Qb8 38. Bc3 Qc7 39. Be1 Qb8 40. Bc3 Qc7 41. Be1 Qb8 42. Bf3 Qc7 43. Bd1 Qb8 44. Be2 Qc7 45. Bg3 Qb8 46. Be1 Qc7 47. Bf2 Qb8 48. Bf3 Qc7 49. Be1 Qb8 50. Bd1 Qc7 51. Kb2 Qb8 52. Ka2 Qc7 53. Kb1 Qb8 54. Kb2 Qc7 55. Ka2 Qb8 56. Kb3 Qc7 57. Kb2 Qb8 58. Kc1 Qc7 59. Bc3 Qb8 60. Be1 Qc7 61. Bc3 Qb8 62. Ne5 Qc7 63. hxg6 hxg6 64. Ned3 Qb8 65. Ne5 Qc7 66. Ned3 Qb8 67. Bb2 Qc7 68. Ne5 Qb8 69. Be2 Qc7 70. Kb1 Qb8 71. Ka2 Qc7 72. Kb1 Qb8 73. Bc3 Qc7 74. Kb2 Qb8 75. Kb3 Qc7 76. Kb2 Qb8 77. Kc1 Qc7 78. Kb1 Qb8 79. Kb2 Qc7 80. Kc1 Qb8 81. Kb2 Qc7 82. Ned3 Qb8 83. Be1 Qc7 84. Bc3 Qb8 85. Kb3 Qc7 86. Ne5 Qb8 87. Ned3 Qc7 88. Be1 Qb8 89. Ka2 Qc7 90. Kb1 Qb8 91. Ka2 Qc7 92. Kb1 Qb8 93. Kb2 Qc7 94. Ka2 Qb8 95. Kb1 Qc7 96. Kb2 Qb8 97. Kb1 Qc7 98. Kb2 Qb8 99. Kb3 Qc7 100. Bc3 Qb8 101. Bb2 Qc7 102. Bc3 Qb8 103. Be1 Qc7 104. Bf3 Qb8 105. Ka2 Qc7 106. Kb1 Qb8 107. Kc1 Qc7 108. Kd1 Qb8 109. Kc1 Qc7 110. Kb1 Qb8 111. Kb2 Qc7 112. c3 Qb8 113. Ne5 Qc7 114. Ned3 Qb8 115. Kb1 Qc7 116. Bg3 Qb8 117. Ne5 Qc7 118. Ned3 Qb8 119. Ne5 Qc7 120. Kb2 Qb8 121. Kc2 Qc7 122. Ned3 Qb8 123. Ne5 Qc7 124. Ned3 Qb8 125. Bd1 Qc7 126. Kd2 Qb8 127. Kc2 Qc7 128. Kb2 Qb8 129. Kb3 Qc7 130. Kc2 Qb8 131. Kb2 Qc7 132. Kc2 Qb8 133. Kb3 Qc7 134. Ka2 Qb8 135. Ka3 Qc7 136. Kb3 Qb8 137. Kb2 Qc7 138. Kb3 Qb8 139. Bf3 Qc7 140. Kb2 Qb8 141. Kc2 Qc7 142. Kd1 Qb8 143. Kc2 Qc7 144. Kc1 Qb8 145. Kd1 Qc7 146. Kc1 Qb8 147. Bd1 Qc7 148. Rh3 Qb8 149. Bf3 Qc7 150. Bd1 Qb8 151. Be1 Qc7 152. Kb1 Qb8 153. Kb2 Qc7 154. Kc1 Qb8 155. Kb1 Qc7 156. Kb2 Qb8 157. Kc1 Qc7 158. Kb1 Qb8 159. Kb2 Qc7 160. Kc2 Qb8 161. Ne5 Qc7 162. Ned3 { The game is a draw. } 1/2-1/2[/pgn]