< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·
|Dec-07-17|| ||Magpye: This is ridiculous.|
|Dec-07-17|| ||patzer2: <Marmot PFL: Ridiculous game. A novice could see that 13 Nxe5 isn't going to work, even if it doesn't actually lose> Can't attribute 13. Nxe5?! to the one minute per move time control in this match. After over ten minutes at 32 ply, Stockfish 8 still picks 13. Nxe5 as its first choice.|
Alpha Zero correctly judges that active piece placement is more important than three pawns for the piece with the strong pawn sham sacrifice 24...a5! 25. Rxa5 Rxa5 = to ⩱.
|Dec-08-17|| ||makinavaja: I agree with you, Marmot PFL, and with all of you who think that this game is ridiculous. Why it is thought that true chess players are silly?|
|Dec-08-17|| ||keypusher: <makinavaja: I agree with you, Marmot PFL, and with all of you who think that this game is ridiculous. Why it is thought that true chess players are silly?>|
Because they are. Just look at the posts on this page for proof.
|Dec-08-17|| ||attack2006: please upload all games|
|Dec-08-17|| ||makinavaja: Keypusher, neither Thersites nor Romulus Augustulus would have played !3.Kxe5 if they were more drunk than Alexander the Great during his last night on earth...
Do you play chess or jacks, Keypusher?|
|Dec-08-17|| ||keypusher: <makinavaja: Keypusher, neither Thersites nor Romulus Augustulus would have played !3.Kxe5 if they were more drunk than Alexander the Great during his last night on earth... Do you play chess or jacks, Keypusher?>|
But a program that is much stronger than either picks 13.Nxe5 after 10 minutes' consideration. And you're getting sillier.
|Dec-09-17|| ||makinavaja: Oh! I am not so silly to trust blindly in a computer!|
|Dec-09-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: Exactly, it's geometry what counts. Engines or no engines. My theory is: as long as we haven't figured out the mystery behind chess geometry, the engines will be clueless about this mystery too! It's only logical, I assume.|
|Dec-09-17|| ||dannygjk: Hmmmm interesting that evaluation settings I created to be aggressive and willing to sac pawns and/or pieces does not like the sac at move 13. It makes me wonder if Stockfish realizes it is already in trouble and thus sacs a knight for 2 pawns.|
|Dec-09-17|| ||dannygjk: beenthere240: I like the way Stockfish gleefully divested itself of its pawns toward the end of the game.|
lol Stockfish:"Do something you fools!"
|Dec-09-17|| ||dannygjk: btw how do I properly quote people? lol|
|Dec-09-17|| ||zanzibar: <<dannygjk:> btw how do I properly quote people? lol>|
There's no one-true convention. But generally it's best to put the person, then the quote (in quotes).
Highlighting with angle-brackets, i.e. < ...person: "quote"...> is nice for the eyes (emphasis), like <keypusher> does.
I like to put angle-brackets around the person's name too, see this post.
|Dec-09-17|| ||dannygjk: Thanks. ok time for a nap I spent all night, (and all evening), watching videos analysing the AZ vs SF games!|
|Dec-11-17|| ||Tal1949: I am sorry Google- but this game is just ridiculous. Stockfish 8 does not play any of the moves that you claim it does.
11. Kh1 12. a5 35. Nc4
These are all moves that a 3200 level engine would never play. In fact, 5 out of 28 moves in the middle game (17.8%) are not Stockfish 8 moves, regardless of the time control or lack of opening book.
Please do not tamper with the Strength configuration or Contempt- we know what you are doing.
|Dec-11-17|| ||The Kings Domain: Good game played in fittingly machine-like precision. Black's 8)... f6 is interesting and served it well.|
|Dec-11-17|| ||talwnbe4: 11. Kh1?! isn't Stockfish... ,
11. Qc3 or 11. Be3 seem better
although not a big difference in
Don't think Stockfish was designed for multicore, it's an opensource engine.
|Dec-11-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: Ghe what about 8. Qe1?
Seriously... this move is interesting if one takes the blabla from the top GMs about this *match* into consideration.
Except Naka (and the ones who refused to react to this nonsense) the whole bunch seems to make a rather unsophisticated impression as it comes to the sense of reality.
|Dec-11-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: PS And yet, as if I come from the Planet of the Apes, I am the only one who comments on it.
Probably the rest of my fellow humans beings are too embarrassed to react on such imbecilities. The usual.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||talwnbe4: WorstPlayerEver, I don't think the best players ever even look at a chessboard.|
|Dec-12-17|| ||WorstPlayerEver: <talwnbe4>
Lol I was pretty high because of all the medication, when I wrote that.
Well, I'd rather seen the Berlin. Or the Najdorf, but I guess A0 would not take such lines seriously ;)
|Dec-12-17|| ||devere: <Tal1949: I am sorry Google- but this game is just ridiculous. Stockfish 8 does not play any of the moves that you claim it does.>|
Yes, it seems that this "match" is just a publicity stunt by Google to impress gullible people like me. But now even I have figured out the real game they are playing isn't chess.
|Dec-12-17|| ||john barleycorn: <devere: ...
this "match" is just a publicity stunt by Google ...>
I agree. When things look too good, the chandeliers are too awesome ... you are into a scam. Especially, when Kasparov's face shows up.
|Dec-13-17|| ||dannygjk: SF still manages it's time well at various time controls. By the way time management is a non-factor at fixed time/move controls.
The book-Even when Stockfish followed theory in these published games AZ outplayed SF after the opening.
EGTB-Stockfish had lost positions before the EGTB would be of any use.
Hash transposition size-Try it yourself give SF a big hash and see how long it takes SF to see that AZ's sacs were sound.
Based on what I have seen in the published games my theory why AZ outplayed SF is that AZ has vastly superior move ordering. This is supported by the fact that SF was doing 70,000,000 nps while AZ was doing only 80,000 nps. Even if SF has a huge transposition hash table that won't be enough to compensate for much inferior move ordering. Inferior move ordering results in too much time wasted on pointless variations. SF will miss crucial variations because of that.|
|Dec-13-17|| ||kjr63: Is ..Bc5 and ..Nd7 an opening novelty?|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 2 ·