chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
AlphaZero (Computer) vs Stockfish (Computer)
"Welcome Our New Robot Overlords" (game of the day Dec-08-2017)
AlphaZero - Stockfish (2017), London ENG, Dec-04
French Defense: Steinitz Variation (C11)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

NOTE: You are using our new chess viewer, "Olga." For more info see the Olga Quickstart Guide. You can switch back to the old viewer (pgn4web) from the pulldown menu below. If you have questions or suggestions see our Olga chessforum.

explore this opening
find similar games 9 more AlphaZero/Stockfish games
sac: 30.Bxg6 PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can step through the moves by clicking the and buttons, but it's much easier to simply use the left and right arrow keys on your keyboard.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

A COMPUTER ANNOTATED SCORE OF THIS GAME IS AVAILABLE.  [CLICK HERE]

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Dec-08-17  JPi: <ughaibu> Of course Bxg6!! is a great move that for example in the last century, Rudolph Spielmann might have played. But for Chess program or actual top GMs you can't play it just by intuition of "beauty", you have to evaluate exactly that Black Bishop will never getlife as well the other black pieces after 34.f6. Really not an obvious task... 7.Nb5!; 9.b4!; 16&17.Kd2&Ke3!;18.g4! and so on... all good or great moves that put together makes the game fantastic!
Dec-09-17  ughaibu: <you can't play it just by intuition of "beauty">

I don't think that it is super-human to select the move based on positional judgement. In fact, I think there are plenty of examples of moves, selected by human beings, for which it is more difficult to make such a judgement.

<all good or great moves that put together makes the game fantastic!>

It's a nice game, but I've seen better, even amongst those played in the past few weeks. Does this hyperbole indicate that it's exceedingly rare for a computer to play a nice game?

Dec-09-17  JPi: <ughaibu> Of course I can't judge how much you appreciate the game. More and less matter of individual judgement and capacity for. However it will good to know what think world top GMs about. I'm too far from such level to have a relevant opinion but I doubt they will do better than Stockfish. By the way what are the games of past weeks you think of better quality?
Dec-09-17  ughaibu: <it will good to know what think world top GMs about>

Sure, I think so too.

<By the way what are the games of past weeks you think of better quality?>

Here are a couple played by Aronian: Aronian vs I Nepomniachtchi, 2017 and Aronian vs Ding Liren, 2017. No doubt there are plenty more played by both him and others.

Dec-09-17  JPi: Well I liked these games too but I will not say of "better quality". We have to wait GMs (Among them Aronian) comments about this match Alpha0 vs Stockfish.
Dec-09-17  ughaibu: <I liked these games too but I will not say of "better quality".>

Fair enough, but "better quality" wasn't my description. My adjective was "nice", and I think that the above, human games, are "better" as I find them nicer.

However, I also I think that they show more unexpectedness and originality than the computer's game, I also think the ideas are deeper, so I don't think there's any obvious notion of "quality" by which the computer's game would qualify as better.

If you think the computer's game is of better quality, what are your criteria for that judgement?

Dec-09-17  JPi: About criterium of quality an obvious one is the tactical correctness then a more delicate one, how one side builds a decisive advantage. On these aspects Apha0 was quite impressive. Enough to "surprise" Stockfish.

"nicer" is indeed a subjective concept... For my part I didn't feel Aronian' games "nicer" Leaves to be subjective, I will wait the most relevant opinions of top GMs about this game. Let's wait it.

Dec-09-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  luzhin: It's the voluntary king march to e3 in the opening that gets me. Steinitz was right after all....
Dec-09-17  scholes: analysis of move 38...?

CG SF analysis after white 38th move. SF playing in this game, was playing on 64 cores, it saw it is lost and did not play most stubborn defence.If SF kept playing most stubborn defence then positional nature of sac will be clear. Still I think there are many kibitzers on this site who would have found this sac in seconds.

Dec-09-17  ughaibu: <it saw it is lost and did not play most stubborn defence>

But the analysis that you posted doesn't say that it's lost. So, are you seriously suggesting that Stockfish lost on purpose? Maybe it's in love with the other box.

Dec-09-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Penguincw: Video analysis of this game: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4eb....
Dec-11-17  Tal1949: This was a lovely game played by AlphaZero. Stockfish 8 was totally clueless in many of these positions, confirmed by my super computer here.

However, the latest development version of Stockfish handles these positions easily. So, Google, stop playing marketing games against old chess engines. Trying playing the best at you might learn that you are not as good as you think you are.

Dec-11-17  TheSnear: I stopped viewing the game after 6...cxd4?! Stockfish has limited opening knowledge and relies on a reasonable opening book. No opening book prefers this move.
Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  whiteshark: <TheSnear> Right, but after <6...cxd4?! White uncorked <7.Nb5 TN>>


click for larger view

Opening Explorer

Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: <TheSnear: I stopped viewing the game after 6...cxd4?! Stockfish has limited opening knowledge and relies on a reasonable opening book. No opening book prefers this move.>

That's a stupid reason not to look at a great game of chess.

Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  MissScarlett: <Passive aggressive behaviour takes many forms but can generally be described as a non-verbal aggression that manifests in negative behavior. It is where you are angry with someone but do not or cannot tell them.>
Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: Well.. after 6... cxd4 Stockfish also plays 7. Nb5 it's weird also that A0 frequently plays good old Stockfish moves while Stockchips itself doesn't. Remarkable method of projection. So to speak (hereby I mean not So himself, obviously). I just checked it (old version 8), and I never use openings books for Stockfish. I almost forgot.

Because... because... that would spoil all the fun :P

<That's a stupid reason not to look at a great game of chess.>

Maybe you should try Fool's Mate sometimes, <keycrusher>. It's also easy to remember..

Besides, you are cherry licking. This whole project is a scam and you know it (that I'm sexy)

Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: < WorstPlayerEver: Well.. after 6... cxd4 Stockfish also plays 7. Nb5 it's weird also that A0 frequently plays good old Stockfish moves while Stockchips itself doesn't. Remarkable method of projection. So to speak (hereby I mean not So himself, obviously). I just checked it (old version 8), and I never use openings books for Stockfish. I almost forgot. Because... because... that would spoil all the fun :P

<That's a stupid reason not to look at a great game of chess.>

Maybe you should try Fool's Mate sometimes, <keycrusher>. It's also easy to remember..

Besides, you are cherry licking. This whole project is a scam and you know it (that I'm sexy)>

You post a lot of crap on many topics, but it's incredible how brain-dead your posts on this match have been.

Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <keymusher>

Brain-dead? Well, actually we are speaking of a dead brain. Pretty close but no marmalade.

If you weren't that lame, you had checked this variation at cg here and noticed that there are 2,746 games (1897-2017) after 6. Nf3 and only 15 games with 6... cxd4, 0.05% (although I think some more if one counts the transpositions).

2,510 games with 6... Nc6

But that's not all; 6... cxd4 has 46.7% losses for Black. Which is the high score in this variation (6. Nf3).

In 120 years 15 games of theory. You probably think that's romantic. And what do you know?

They all played 7. Nxd4

Ha ha ha isn't that ironic? And yes, the experts always think they know everything obvious... until it's obvious that they know very little about any subject en detail.

Speaking of details:

http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccr...

Now, what do you know? There are 9337/C11 games from 2006 until now. Hundreds start with 6. Nf3 but none of dem engees play 6... cxd4, check it for yourself. Have fun! NONE OF THEM!!!

I *wonder* why...

But... eh.. Stockfish plays 6... cxd4 and you are going to tell us how wonderful that is and oh, what a great game! And call ME an idiot (not that it's of any importancy; I probably am).

In what aspect? The aspect of cheating? What great game? Just like the other ones??? Get away!!!

Dec-11-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: PS

I hope you DO understand that these are nice puzzles, show how most extreme inactivity doesn't work in chess, you don't say, but the games DO NOT HAVE any relevance to any chess theory whatsoever. Who knows what the future may bring. But that's another question. So far.

Take your pick.

Dec-12-17  frogbert: It seems like several of you are missing what <Olavi> is actually saying. Depth-first with alpha-beta pruning is great in the big majority of chess positions - but there are well known issues in some positions where the horizon effect (two words that many people on this site use without really getting the impact of the concept) punishes Stockfish and friends quite ruthlessly.

Consider this recent game from the European Team Championship: Y Kuzubov vs V Sanal, 2017 - or more specifically this position:


click for larger view

Even at a depth of 60 ply, droidfish v 1.71 (a packaging of Stockfish for cell phones, using a build of Stockfish from september 2017) wants to play the blunder Rxf1+ followed by Bxa3 - which is a dead draw, despite the position before Rxf1+ being completely won for black (as demonstrated by Sanal in the game). Why? Horizon effect which causes the engine to choose the *local* maximum within its horizon, in other words the blunder Rxf1+ which wins the most material.

To quote the AlphaZero paper:

<AlphaZero evaluates positions using non-linear function approximation based on a deep neural network, rather than the linear function approximation used in typical chess programs. This provides a much more powerful representation, but may also introduce spurious approximation errors. MCTS averages over these approximation errors, which therefore tend to cancel out when evaluating a large subtree. In contrast, alpha-beta search computes an explicit minimax, which propagates the biggest approximation errors to the root of the subtree.>

Hence, for certain kinds of positions, an MCTS will provide better results, as it doesn't prune away the winning move/line the way a "standard" mini-max search may happen to do - or, like here, propagate the huge approximation error -4 point something (after Rxf1+) to the root of the search tree. (The correct evaluation of Rxf1+ is 0.00.)

This is basically the same kind of issue that makes it hard for (older versions of) Stockfish (and friends) to find/see the Bxg6 sacrifice in the current game - even though human, strong players at IM level (or even lower) will understand that Bxg6! is a very good move. To avoid blunders like Rxf1+ in the above position, the mini-max algorithm needs additional tinkering.

More or less by the same reasoning, there will be lots of positions where the "standard" mini-max algorithm will outperform the Monte Carlo Tree Search applied by AlphaZero too, in particular when it comes to "pure tactics" in variations that span over many, many moves.

Dec-12-17  frogbert: <Olavi: If a human beats another 100-0, you can trust that (s)he is better in everything about chess, some specialities excluded. But that's still not the case with engines. Some quite normal positions are handled better by say a well read IM, e.g. me, than Stockfish>

In short, I support the above statement from <Olavi> 100%. What he says is true, and the creators of Stockfish would agree with him. There's nothing controversial about such a statement at all.

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <wpe....Besides, you are cherry licking. This whole project is a scam and you know it (that I'm sexy)>>

Cherry licking? Really?

<keypusher....You post a lot of crap on many topics....>

This is true beyond question.

Dec-12-17
Premium Chessgames Member
  Eisenheim: By Move 27 its incredible to see how much Space AZ has taken up - it's a them in the games I've seen, along with it breaking the adage of touching the same piece twice in exchange for more space. Would love to see a match between it and
Dec-20-17  brimarern: A ridiculously beautiful game! It has a feel like something produced by World Champion Capablanca. A piece for one pawn? And AlphaZero has such a grip on the position that it finds moves that look so patient, yet doesn't let black off the hook! I need to add this game to my memory collection!! Stunningly beautiful.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 4)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 4 OF 4 ·  Later Kibitzing>
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
2017 games
by Severin
53c_Middlegames_Positional piece sacrifices
by whiteshark
AlphaZero the new superhuman champion!
from jcruelty's favorite games by jcruelty
December 8: Welcome Our New Robot Overlords
from Game of the Day 2017 by Phony Benoni
samuel66's favorite games
by samuel66
French Defense: Steinitz. Boleslavsky Variation
by ISeth
Chess Network Videos: Part 3
by Penguincw
perfidious' favourite king marches
by perfidious
MKD's French Defense
by MKD
97h_C11_Steinitz. Boleslavsky Variation Opposite
by whiteshark


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC