The world of chess changed considerably after the introduction of AlphaZero to chess. As described here the DeepMind engine won a competition against Stockfish 8 (28 wins - 72 draws - 0 losses). As this library was set out to discover surprising moves in chess games (see below for describtion and examples), I wanted to see if a reanalysis on the games of AlphaZero with the same engine brought some inside into the thought process of Stockfish 8.
Game 10
In game 10 there were probably a lot of surprising moves but one of the most daring moves was move 19 by white (AlphaZero). In this position it decided not to save its knight (Ng4) but to play Re1.
After analysing the game with this library we get this heatmap which shows us the evaluations of Stockfish 8 over each depth for each half-move.
As one can see move 19 was also surprising to Stockfish (half-move number 38) where even for very high depths it still believed his position to be advantageous. The first time Stockfish actually saw a superior position of AlphaZero was at half-move 65.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-future-is-here-alphazero-learns-chess
Fascinating read about how a program that had been given zero chess knowledge, opening related or otherwise, just by using a General Reinforcement Learning Algorithm did learn to play Chess so well in a very short time, that it just beat the strongest chess program to date.
And it did so on significantly weaker hardware.
https://en.chessbase.com/post/the-future-is-here-alphazero-learns-chess
Fascinating read about how a program that had been given zero chess knowledge, opening related or otherwise, just by using a General Reinforcement Learning Algorithm did learn to play Chess so well in a very short time, that it just beat the strongest chess program to date.
And it did so on significantly weaker hardware.
They tend to work if the opponent play stereotypical as they pose some unique problems and in blitz/rapid games.
Haven't played in forever, but I remember typically opening as a newbie with King's Gambit or Guioco Piano (or Ruy Lopez). I can't remember when but at some point I decided to use the Smith-Morra against Sicilian. Have a tendency to sacrifice everything for initiative and tempo lol.
what the FUCK?!!?Haven't played in forever, but I remember typically opening as a newbie with King's Gambit or Guioco Piano (or Ruy Lopez). I can't remember when but at some point I decided to use the Smith-Morra against Sicilian. Have a tendency to sacrifice everything for initiative and tempo lol.
Guioco Piano was my shit.
I kinda lost interest after they decided it was a good idea to play Blitz chess to decide the outcome of the world championship in case there was a draw. What utter garbage.
The final of the FIDE World Cup between Ding Liren and Levon Aronian will be decided in a tiebreak on Wednesday as the fourth game also ended in a draw. It was again Aronian who had the better chances.
After winning their dramatic semifinals with which they reached the Candidates', Ding and Aronian slowed down a bit. All of their games in the World Cup final ended in draws, and so we'll see at least two rapid games tomorrow, and possibly blitz and Armageddon. The winner will earn $120,000 whereas the loser takes home $80,000.
I think it's a result of the problems with past formats. When the 24 game match format was in vogue, where the Champ retained the title on a tie, there were complaints that since GM's playing for a draw can very often achieve it, the player who got an early lead simply started playing for draws. So they changed to the winner must win 6 games in 1978 and Karpov-Korchnoi played 32 games, with the much older Korchnoi exhausted and at a disadvantage at the end.
Today's format, including rapid games, is perhaps the only way to force more wins into the match while keeping to a reasonable schedule.