I toast to LeelaqueenOdds and its creators. I raise my wine glass high and shout: Long live the queen. We have a queen!!

[M ANSARI]

I have played a lot more games against the Queen odds BOT and managed to get wins first from 10min + 5s all the way to 1 min +5s. It is unnerving how stupid you can feel after playing games. I mean really ... so easy to get your queen trapped ... and so easy to fall for primitive one move blunders when time runs down. To be honest, what really got my attention had nothing to do with chess ... that by just creating a neural network with many games, the engine created a map of where humans are most fallible and how to take advantage of that. I couldn't help but think of the consequences of a similar neural network working on say a dating app, a commerce app ... or taking advantage of children or other vulnerable people. I mean we all know about telling kids not to take candy from strangers ... or to avoid the Nigerian Prince with millions in gold that he just needs a little money to get it out of a bank ... however this takes it to another level !!! A neural network will identify the weaknesses of humans and focus on that. You might avoid pitfalls every once in a while, but when there is pressure (in case of chess it is time) your chances of making a wrong decision are dramatically higher. The NN will understand that and use that. Scary stuff!

[Father]

I have played a lot more games against the Queen odds BOT and managed to get wins first from 10min + 5s all the way to 1 min +5s. It is unnerving how stupid you can feel after playing games. I mean really ... so easy to get your queen trapped ... and so easy to fall for primitive one move blunders when time runs down. To be honest, what really got my attention had nothing to do with chess ... that by just creating a neural network with many games, the engine created a map of where humans are most fallible and how to take advantage of that. I couldn't help but think of the consequences of a similar neural network working on say a dating app, a commerce app ... or taking advantage of children or other vulnerable people. I mean we all know about telling kids not to take candy from strangers ... or to avoid the Nigerian Prince with millions in gold that he just needs a little money to get it out of a bank ... however this takes it to another level !!! A neural network will identify the weaknesses of humans and focus on that. You might avoid pitfalls every once in a while, but when there is pressure (in case of chess it is time) your chances of making a wrong decision are dramatically higher. The NN will understand that and use that. Scary stuff!

[SirSlemp]

250.000+ games!

[Father]

I have played a lot more games against the Queen odds BOT and managed to get wins first from 10min + 5s all the way to 1 min +5s. It is unnerving how stupid you can feel after playing games. I mean really ... so easy to get your queen trapped ... and so easy to fall for primitive one move blunders when time runs down. To be honest, what really got my attention had nothing to do with chess ... that by just creating a neural network with many games, the engine created a map of where humans are most fallible and how to take advantage of that. I couldn't help but think of the consequences of a similar neural network working on say a dating app, a commerce app ... or taking advantage of children or other vulnerable people. I mean we all know about telling kids not to take candy from strangers ... or to avoid the Nigerian Prince with millions in gold that he just needs a little money to get it out of a bank ... however this takes it to another level !!! A neural network will identify the weaknesses of humans and focus on that. You might avoid pitfalls every once in a while, but when there is pressure (in case of chess it is time) your chances of making a wrong decision are dramatically higher. The NN will understand that and use that. Scary stuff!

Good evening, Mr. Larry Kaufman. I've continued to observe the rating trends of the top 100 humans on the LeelaQueenOdds leaderboard.
I've found an "upward" trend in the sense that 97% of the ratings on the leaderboard now start at 2200. The vast majority of the humans on the leaderboard are strong players, and we should be able to defeat the robot at all levels of play. But NO! The robot is getting better every day. Today, I wonder what the limit is. The truth is that by "exclusion of matter," it is concluded that those who are not on the leaderboard every day are or represent a sector of strong players. In other words, LeelaQueenOdds would be part of "a club of players to which only strong players can aspire."

[Father]

I have played a lot more games against the Queen odds BOT and managed to get wins first from 10min + 5s all the way to 1 min +5s. It is unnerving how stupid you can feel after playing games. I mean really ... so easy to get your queen trapped ... and so easy to fall for primitive one move blunders when time runs down. To be honest, what really got my attention had nothing to do with chess ... that by just creating a neural network with many games, the engine created a map of where humans are most fallible and how to take advantage of that. I couldn't help but think of the consequences of a similar neural network working on say a dating app, a commerce app ... or taking advantage of children or other vulnerable people. I mean we all know about telling kids not to take candy from strangers ... or to avoid the Nigerian Prince with millions in gold that he just needs a little money to get it out of a bank ... however this takes it to another level !!! A neural network will identify the weaknesses of humans and focus on that. You might avoid pitfalls every once in a while, but when there is pressure (in case of chess it is time) your chances of making a wrong decision are dramatically higher. The NN will understand that and use that. Scary stuff!

Good evening, Mr. Larry Kaufman. I've continued to observe the rating trends of the top 100 humans on the LeelaQueenOdds leaderboard.
I've found an "upward" trend in the sense that 97% of the ratings on the leaderboard now start at 2200. The vast majority of the humans on the leaderboard are strong players, and we should be able to defeat the robot at all levels of play. But NO! The robot is getting better every day. Today, I wonder what the limit is. The truth is that by "exclusion of matter," it is concluded that those who are not on the leaderboard every day are or represent a sector of strong players. In other words, LeelaQueenOdds would be part of "a club of players to which only strong players can aspire."

Good morning, Mr. Larry Kaufman and the LeelaQueenOdds development team.
Although you have not asked my opinion on the perceived intelligence and reasoning of the LeealaQueenOdds algorithm, I respectfully provide my opinion:
1- LeelaQueenOdds now appears to play "faster."
2- LeelaQueenOdds more often evades previous draw lines.
3- LeelaQueenOdds makes use of innovative new "counter lines of play."
4- LeelaQueenOdds in some situations "sacrifices material" to avoid a 50-move draw.
5- LeelaQueenOdds in some situations "sacrifices material" to push the human beyond the final time line.
Regarding my human intelligence:
1- I perceive some of the robot's weaknesses.
2- I interpret, understand, and adapt to robot modifications and new trends.
3- My rocking horse, "Catecan" (in memory of my deceased father), and I definitely choose to ride, feel the wind and the sun on our faces, and look at the moon and stars at night—that is, to play—rather than chase the "Elo" rating.
Today I am grateful for life, for the human family to which I proudly belong, for robots, for my ideals and imaginary dreams, for my rocking horse, and on this day, when many years ago my father embarked on his journey to eternity. He was a great warrior; I only inherited a small spark of his being, and in the memory of his Catecan, I will conquer robots. I congratulate the entire team working at LeelaQueenOdds. Believe me, the fruits of their efforts are palpable at first glance and in depth. Great work!

[lkaufman]

Good evening, Mr. Larry Kaufman. I've continued to observe the rating trends of the top 100 humans on the LeelaQueenOdds leaderboard.
I've found an "upward" trend in the sense that 97% of the ratings on the leaderboard now start at 2200. The vast majority of the humans on the leaderboard are strong players, and we should be able to defeat the robot at all levels of play. But NO! The robot is getting better every day. Today, I wonder what the limit is. The truth is that by "exclusion of matter," it is concluded that those who are not on the leaderboard every day are or represent a sector of strong players. In other words, LeelaQueenOdds would be part of "a club of players to which only strong players can aspire."

Good morning, Mr. Larry Kaufman and the LeelaQueenOdds development team.
Although you have not asked my opinion on the perceived intelligence and reasoning of the LeealaQueenOdds algorithm, I respectfully provide my opinion:
1- LeelaQueenOdds now appears to play "faster."
2- LeelaQueenOdds more often evades previous draw lines.
3- LeelaQueenOdds makes use of innovative new "counter lines of play."
4- LeelaQueenOdds in some situations "sacrifices material" to avoid a 50-move draw.
5- LeelaQueenOdds in some situations "sacrifices material" to push the human beyond the final time line.
Regarding my human intelligence:
1- I perceive some of the robot's weaknesses.
2- I interpret, understand, and adapt to robot modifications and new trends.
3- My rocking horse, "Catecan" (in memory of my deceased father), and I definitely choose to ride, feel the wind and the sun on our faces, and look at the moon and stars at night—that is, to play—rather than chase the "Elo" rating.
Today I am grateful for life, for the human family to which I proudly belong, for robots, for my ideals and imaginary dreams, for my rocking horse, and on this day, when many years ago my father embarked on his journey to eternity. He was a great warrior; I only inherited a small spark of his being, and in the memory of his Catecan, I will conquer robots. I congratulate the entire team working at LeelaQueenOdds. Believe me, the fruits of their efforts are palpable at first glance and in depth. Great work!
[/quote]

There haven't been any changes to the LeelaQueenOdds bot lately, other than occasional updates of the opening book. The attempt to use actual human games to train it didn't work out. However, it may be playing a bit faster and perhaps a bit better lately simply due to reduced demand. The bot is still very popular, the most popular bot on LiChess, but demand has dropped from a peak level of about 7000 games a day to a more manageable 3000 or so (still way up from a couple months ago). This means that the GPU is less likely to have to share time between multiple games, which speeds it up and especially in bullet games it will be more likely to reach its node limit. So a lot of what you see as improvement is just due to being able to reach the intended node limit and to leave less time for the human to think while Leela is thinking. A new net should be trained soon, but we don't know until it is tested whether it will actually be better. I can also mention that one player with a bullet rating over 3000, after losing many games at queen odds in 1'0", decided to try queen plus rook odds at same TC, played two games and drew both! Imagine, giving queen and rook to a 3000+ player and breaking even! In slower games, GM Danny Gormally played 30 games with LeelaRookOdds at rook and move odds (meaning Gormally also took White every game), at 5'+3", and lost 29 to 1! The results of the bots are really just beyond belief, way past what was thought to be possible.

[SirSlemp]

Play seems restricted to 8 games and the bot is often unavailable because of high demand. I don't know how much resources it tames, bit if the # of players could be raised, that would be great!

[lkaufman]

Play seems restricted to 8 games and the bot is often unavailable because of high demand. I don't know how much resources it tames, bit if the # of players could be raised, that would be great!

Thanks, it was just restored to 18 for now, but there is some bug that causes finished or aborted games to count so it needs to be restarted every day or so.

[SirSlemp]

Yes, the rumours are true! After only 194 games I managed to win!

[Uri Blass]

I think that we need some competition with significant money prizes to see what humans can really do against LeelaQueenOdds without Qd1.

My idea is that every player choose the time control that he prefers that has to be of the time X minutes per game + Y seconds per game when X and Y are integers and Y is the closest to X/2 that means the following time controls are allowed
1+0.1+1,2+1,3+1,3+2,4+2,5+2,5+3,6+3,7+3,7+4,8+4,9+4,9+5,10+5

Every player play a match of 10 games against LeelaQueenOdds when the ranking is based on the cube of number of points divided by X+Y

For example losing 6-4 at 1+0 gives 4^3 points that is 64 and winning 10-0 at 10+5 gives 10^3/15 points that is 66+2/3 so winning 10-0 at 10+5 is better than losing 6-4 at 1+0 but worse than losing 5.5-4.5 at 1+0 that gives 91.125

We can give prizes to the first 3 players that are proptional to the number that they get in the ranking.

What is your opinion?

Joel Benjamin (SuperEasy) consistently scores 9, 9.5, or 10 out of 10 at 8'3" (not on your list but about same as 7'4"), so he would get between 65 and 91 points each time based on past results. I think it would be an interesting contest, but are you talking about an open contest on the internet, where cheating would be a concern, or a monitored event by you in Israel? It is unfortunate that any time money prizes are offered to the general public for similar events, cheating seems to be a real problem. It's fairly easy to catch cheaters in bullet chess events, where the cheating is generally automated, but in Rapid it's extremely hard to catch sporadic cheaters. Assuming a monitored event, I think most players will select the shortest time control at which they expect to score like 90% or so, which for most people means the maximum 10'5" will be chosen. If you get GMs then perhaps something like 5'3" will be popular. Results for the bot are pretty amazing, especially in the bullet range. Of course no one can compete at 1'0", but even at 2'0" performance of the bot is astronomical; against players above 2600 LiChess bullet it won 238 games vs. only 4 losses (ten draws). I don't think that incentives matter for bullet games, they are rarely drawn so it hardly matters if players resign in drawable positions, and they surely don't move too fast. But the longer the time limit, the more important incentive and motivation become, so I agree that if we want to measure performance in Rapid, some incentives are needed.

I consider organizing this competition.

I plan to donate 3000 shekels to the prize money that is something near 800 dollars.
I wonder how many players can practically play at the same time(I may invite only limited number of players to the competition because I assume Leela cannot play too many games at the same time and I do not want Leela to perofrm worse because of playing too many games at the same time.

If it is possible it is better not to allow everybody to play against lc0 in the time cf the competition but only the players who play against it.