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

AlphaZero (Computer)
  
Number of games in database: 220
Years covered: 2017 to 2018

Overall record: +62 -11 =147 (61.6%)*
   * Overall winning percentage = (wins+draws/2) / total games in the database.

MOST PLAYED OPENINGS
With the White pieces:
 Queen's Indian (40) 
    E15 E17 E16 E18
 English (12) 
    A17 A15
 French Defense (12) 
    C11 C02 C13 C14 C18
 Nimzo Indian (12) 
    E21 E47 E46 E53 E41
 Queen's Pawn Game (9) 
    E00 D02 E10 A45
 Semi-Slav (9) 
    D43 D44 D45
With the Black pieces:
 Ruy Lopez (24) 
    C67 C65 C69 C95 C63
 Sicilian (7) 
    B67 B80 B90 B78 B48
 Giuoco Piano (6) 
    C50 C53
 King's Indian (5) 
    E99 E60 E87 E84 E81
 Queen's Gambit Declined (4) 
    D37 D39 D31 D38
 French Defense (4) 
    C13 C14 C18 C11
Repertoire Explorer

NOTABLE GAMES: [what is this?]
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2017 1-0
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2018 1-0
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2017 1-0
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2017 1-0
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2018 1-0
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2017 1-0
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero, 2017 0-1
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero, 2018 1/2-1/2
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish, 2018 1-0
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero, 2018 1/2-1/2

NOTABLE TOURNAMENTS: [what is this?]
   AlphaZero - Stockfish (2017)
   AlphaZero - Stockfish Match (2018)

GAME COLLECTIONS: [what is this?]
   Game Changer by keypusher
   Alphazero brilliancies by Elesius
   Stockfish - AlphaZero (2017) by hukes70
   AlphaZero by ThirdPawn

RECENT GAMES:
   🏆 AlphaZero - Stockfish Match
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish (Jan-18-18) 1-0
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero (Jan-18-18) 1/2-1/2
   AlphaZero vs Stockfish (Jan-18-18) 1/2-1/2
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero (Jan-18-18) 0-1
   Stockfish vs AlphaZero (Jan-18-18) 1/2-1/2

Search Sacrifice Explorer for AlphaZero (Computer)
Search Google for AlphaZero (Computer)


ALPHAZERO (COMPUTER)

[what is this?]

AlphaZero is an application of the Google DeepMind AI project applied to chess and Shogi. In late 2017 experiments, it quickly demonstrated itself superior to any technology that we would otherwise consider leading-edge.

(1) Mastering Chess and Shogi by Self-Play with a General Reinforcement Learning Algorithm - https://arxiv.org/pdf/1712.01815.pdf

https://www.chessprogramming.org/Al...

Wikipedia article: AlphaZero

Last updated: 2018-12-02 14:34:00

 page 1 of 9; games 1-25 of 220  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-01172017AlphaZero - StockfishE17 Queen's Indian
2. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0562017AlphaZero - StockfishE17 Queen's Indian
3. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0952017AlphaZero - StockfishC11 French
4. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0522017AlphaZero - StockfishC11 French
5. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0602017AlphaZero - StockfishE15 Queen's Indian
6. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0682017AlphaZero - StockfishE16 Queen's Indian
7. Stockfish vs AlphaZero 0-1872017AlphaZero - StockfishC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
8. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-01002017AlphaZero - StockfishE16 Queen's Indian
9. Stockfish vs AlphaZero 0-1672017AlphaZero - StockfishC65 Ruy Lopez, Berlin Defense
10. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0702017AlphaZero - StockfishE17 Queen's Indian
11. Stockfish vs AlphaZero ½-½892018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchD34 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
12. Stockfish vs AlphaZero ½-½1092018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchD16 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
13. AlphaZero vs Stockfish ½-½1512018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchD98 Grunfeld, Russian
14. AlphaZero vs Stockfish ½-½542018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchB89 Sicilian
15. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0512018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchA15 English
16. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 1-0532018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchA17 English
17. AlphaZero vs Stockfish 0-11122018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchD43 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
18. Stockfish vs AlphaZero  ½-½1972018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchC67 Ruy Lopez
19. AlphaZero vs Stockfish ½-½1862018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchE15 Queen's Indian
20. AlphaZero vs Stockfish  ½-½1162018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchE18 Queen's Indian, Old Main line, 7.Nc3
21. AlphaZero vs Stockfish  ½-½1592018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchE15 Queen's Indian
22. Stockfish vs AlphaZero ½-½2122018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchC69 Ruy Lopez, Exchange, Gligoric Variation
23. Stockfish vs AlphaZero 1-0622018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchD98 Grunfeld, Russian
24. Stockfish vs AlphaZero 1-0412018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchC95 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Breyer
25. Stockfish vs AlphaZero ½-½2192018AlphaZero - Stockfish MatchC23 Bishop's Opening
 page 1 of 9; games 1-25 of 220  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2) | AlphaZero wins | AlphaZero loses  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 36 OF 37 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Apr-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <AylerKupp>

These are just machines. But what is the point if their openings are chosen by humans?

Apr-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Carbon Engine Data> (part 1 of 2)

White's typical scoring % advantage over Black is about 55% vs. 45%. You can get this information from Opening Explorer but because you are not a premium member, you can't. And this isn't a plug for becoming a premium member (I don't get any kickback for suggesting it) but it's a nominal yearly fee and IMO the extra features are well worth it. But basically in its opening screen Opening Explorer lists the various opening moves in its game database, the number of games in the database for that move, and the number of games that White won, Black won, and the number of drawn games. From that information you can calculate the scoring % for each move. Then, by calculating the number of games won by each side and the games drawn, you can get the total number of games that White won, Black won, and the number of games drawn. And from that you can calculate White's and Black's total scoring %.

Note that this data reflects all the games played regardless of time control and special circumstances (simultaneous exhibitions, blindfold games, casual games, etc.) So if you are only interested in, say, classic time control games, you have more work to do.

As of today Opening Explorer has 909,112 games in its database. White won 343,274 games (37.8%), Black won 255,478 games (28.1%), and 310,360 (34.1%) were drawn. White's scoring % was 54.8% and Black's scoring % was 45.2%.

Because Opening Explorer's database is relatively small, I often use two other databases, 365Chess.com and ChessTempo.com. Both are free for a crippled version of their database, but this data is available in both for free. 365Chess.com has a cleaner look and is easier to use but it has less features.

As of today 365Chess.com has 3,556, 948 games in its database. White won 1,349,749 (37.9%), Black won 1,068,920 (30.1%), and 1,138,279 (32.0%) games were drawn. White's scoring % was 53.9% and Black's scoring % was 46.1%.

As of today ChessTempo.com has 3,556,948 games in its database. White won 1,349,749 (38,6%), Black won 1,068,920 (30.5%), and 1,138,279 (30.9%) games were drawn. White's scoring % was 54.1% and Black's scoring % was 45.9%.

But ChessTempo has a very useful feature, you can filter out games for players that are rated below 2200, 2300, etc. all the way to 2700. So you can easily calculate the % of White wins, Black wins, and drawn games, as well as White and Black scoring % for players of various rating levels.

Apr-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Carbon Engine Data> (part 2 of 2)

This is listed in the following "table". Column 1 is the rating level, column 2 is the total number of games, column 3 is the White win %, column 4 is the Black win %, column 5 is the drawn game %, and columns 6 and 7 are the White and Black scoring %. I've duplicated the data above for All players to make direct comparison easier.

All <3,931,442> 38.6% 30.5% 30.9% 54.1% 45.9%

2200+ <1,860,057> 35.0% 25.5% 39.5% 57.8% 45.2%

2300+ <1,280,277> 33.5% 23.5% 43.0% 55.0% 45.0%

2400+ <754,580> 32.0% 21.5% 46.5% 55.3% 44.7%

2500+ <296,712> 30.2% 19.4% 50.4% 55.4% 44.6%

2600+ <85,795> 29.7% 19.0% 51.3% 55.3% 44.7%

2700+ <20,674> 29.1% 19.3% 51.7% 54.9% 45.1%

Two things I find interesting as far as Carbon Engines are concerned:

1. The drawn games % goes up the higher the players' ratings, and the decisive games % goes down, in general, for both White and Black. This should not be a surprise since in order to win a game one player has to make more mistakes or inaccuracies than their opponent and, the higher the players are rated, the less likely they are to make mistakes.

2. The White and Black scoring %'s are roughly similar regardless of the players' rating, which might be surprising. So this seems to indicate that White's advantage of the opening move is roughly the same regardless of how good or how bad the players are.

Apr-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Silicon Engine Data>

White's typical scoring % advantage over Black is also about 55% vs. 45%, regardless of the time controls used. Fortunately the two chess sites that I use, CCRL (http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/) and CEGT (http://www.cegt.net/) list the total number of games played, and the total number of White wins, Black wins, and drawn games. So it's easy to do the scoring % calculations for each of the time controls that they use in their engine vs. engine tournaments. So there isn't much that I can add to the information I listed for CCRL and CEGT tournaments besides what I indicated in AlphaZero (Computer) (kibitz #893), other than list the White win %, Black win %, drawn games, and White/Black scoring %s. In the following table column 1 lists the tournament and time control, and columns 2 through 4 list the White win %, Black win %, and number of drawn games. And, yes, the %'s don't necessarily add up to 100.0% because of rounding.

CCRL 40/15 34.5% 39.8% 25.6%

CCRL 40/2 34.6% 39.8% 25.6%

CEGT 40/120 31.1% 50.9% 18.0%

CEGT 40/20 35.1% 40.4% 24.5%

CEGT 40/4 38.1% 34.0% 27.8%

And, no, I can't explain the disproportional number of draw % for CEGT 40/120 and CEGT 40/20 time controls, other than perhaps less mistakes are made by the engines at the higher time controls (and different environments) than are made at the faster time controls. Which would make sense since, with less time per move, engines would not be able to search as deeply and possibly overlook better moves.

And I might as well correct the typo for the CCRL 40/15 tournament in AlphaZero (Computer) (kibitz #893). I should have said:

40/15 (Rapid, 1,134,104 games): White's scoring % = 54.5%, Black's scoring % = 45.5%.

Sorry about that.

Apr-15-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<WorstPlayerEver> These are just machines. But what is the point if their openings are chosen by humans?>

The only point is to introduce variety into the games and present possibly new situations to the engines that they may not have faced too many times before. Mathew Saddler says in "Game Changer" that, left to its own devices, AlphaZero would never play 1.e4 because it considers that 1...e5 pretty much equalizes. So much for 1.e4 considered to be best by test! Besides, some engines play some openings and defenses particularly well and others not so well, so in order to determine which is the best engine overall it would be more accurate to force the engine to play different openings and defenses to see if it has any weaknesses that opponents can exploit.

Besides, engine vs. engine tournaments like TCEC are interesting to some of us humans. So TCES forces the engines to play a specific set of openings both as White and as Black. Otherwise, would we consider a Superfinal interesting if it consisted of 100 Sicilian defenses?

And remember that to some extent engines, if left to their own devices, will not play the same moves during a game, including the opening. Neural-networks (NNs) using MCTS make a probabilistic estimate of the move that will give the engine the highest scoring % and play that move. But probability being what it is, of two moves are nearly equally good, one set of calculations might give one move a slightly higher scoring % so it will play that move, but in a subsequent game, if it reaches the same position, a similar set of calculations might give the other move a slightly higher scoring % so it will play that other move instead.

Classic engines using minimax and alpha-beta pruning, particularly multi-core engines, are not deterministic. If you run multiple analysis with the same engine, from the first starting position, and to the same search depth, each analysis will calculate a different evaluation. Not may, will. Guaranteed. So again, if multiple moves have similar evaluations, in on game the engine will play one move in a given position but in a subsequent game it might play a different move.

I suppose that chess engines, like humans, believe that variety is the spice of life.

Apr-16-20  Jambow: <The conclusion seems inescapable. The scoring % is approximately 55% / 45% in White's favor regardless of whether the engines are carbon units or silicon units. And for silicon units the scoring % is also approximately 55%/ 45% in White's favor regardless of the time control.>

Some times our theories are put to rest by actual data, my notion of a philosophical/physiological element is embalmed and prepared for burial.

An ounce of experience is worth a ton of theory... Or in your case 35,274 tonnes... Thanks again ;0]

Apr-16-20  Jambow: <So if that's all the information you want, this might be a good time to suggest that if you or others don't want to see my next few posts, you might consider putting me, hopefully only temporarily, on your ignore list.>

I don't put anyone on ignore generally, certainly not when they are using their time to answer my inane questions.

With the data provided the white vs black advantage is remarkably persistent something my intuition failed to grasp although I was slowly going that direction.

Now there are very high rated players who deviate substantially from 55/45 W vs B results scoring much higher with black or white than the norm... how many standard deviations I'm not sure. Now that one question has been answered beyond satisfaction that begs the next one. What is different in those players approach that seperate them from the statistical norms?

Likewise some players like Peter Leko, Anish Giri and perhaps Vishy Anand later on, that became very drawish which is a separate but related question. Last inane question for the evening are there engines that deviate to any significant degree from 55/45?

Apr-16-20  Jambow: <Classic engines using minimax and alpha-beta pruning, particularly multi-core engines, are not deterministic. If you run multiple analysis with the same engine, from the first starting position, and to the same search depth, each analysis will calculate a different evaluation. Not may, will. Guaranteed. So again, if multiple moves have similar evaluations, in on game the engine will play one move in a given position but in a subsequent game it might play a different move.>

Seems this fact might indeed make catching cheaters more difficult. I guess if they only deviate at equal evaluations you can always force the engine to evaluate from the humans moves, so then again perhaps not an issue.

Apr-16-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<Jambow> Now there are very high rated players who deviate substantially from 55/45 W vs B results scoring much higher with black or white than the norm ... What is different in those players approach that seperate them from the statistical norms?>

What's "different" is that they are individual players and not a group of players. Remember that statistics, in order to be reasonably valid, must consist of a large population. And the smaller the samples taken from that population, the greater the chances of deviation of the norm of the characteristics of that sample from the norm of the characteristics the population.

At the extreme example of one individual, there is probably nothing that we can say with any reasonable degree of confidence about the norm of the characteristics of that individual; the variance between the norm of the characteristics of the entire population and the norm of the characteristics of that individual can be very large. And there can be many, many reasons for those variances, and it is difficult if not impossible to determine which one of those reasons have the greatest influence in causing the deviations from the norms.

<Last inane question for the evening are there engines that deviate to any significant degree from 55/45?>

I would guess so, and for the reasons I mentioned above about players. In this respect, chess engines are no different than players. :-)

But guessing and knowing are two different things (at least for some people), and fortunately both the CCRL and CEGT tournament sites list for each engine the total number of games played, its scoring %, and draw %. From that information and little bit of thought (I'm capable of a little bit of thought, although a lot of thought is a different issue) it's not hard to calculate the number of wins for White.

So. given that Score % = ( No. wins + No. draws/2 ) / No. of games,

Then No. wins = Score % * No. of games No. draws/2

Then applying the first formula we can calculate White's Score %. And, of course, Black's Score % = 1 White's Score %.

The last question is: What do you consider to be a significant degree of deviation from 55/45? 65%/35%?, 70%/30%?, 75%/25%?, or something else? To cover these situations I determined the number of White Score %s that exceeded 65%, 70%, and 75% respectively for the engines in the latest CCRL (Apr-04-20) and CEGT (Apr-05-20) tournaments and the different time controls used by each site. This is a summary of the results; the first column is the site + time control, the second column is the number of engines, and the third through fifth columns are the percentage of the engines that exceeded a White Scoring % of 65%, 70%, and 75% respectively.

CCRL 40/15 <2,637> 3.7% 1.7% 0.2%

CCRL 40/2 <2,623> 5.7% 3.0% 1.3%

CEGT 40/120 <154> 6.5% 0.0% 0.0%

CEGT 40/40 <1,790> 4.1% 2.2% 0.5%

CEGT 40/4 <2,484> 5.9% 3.3% 1.2%

Phew! Thankfully at least for the remainder of the day there will not be any more inane questions. :-)

Apr-16-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<Jambow> Seems this fact might indeed make catching cheaters more difficult.>

But you promised no more inane questions this evening!!! :-)

Apr-17-20  Jambow: <Remember that statistics, in order to be reasonably valid, must consist of a large population. And the smaller the samples taken from that population, the greater the chances of deviation of the norm of the characteristics of that sample from the norm of the characteristics the population.>

Ipso facto...

Yes and I get that answering questions about individuals generically is all but impossible and I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to have a ready answer.

I do find characteristics of playing styles rather interesting. Some players like Levon Aronian if memory serves correct had a much larger % of wins with white and draws with black with Carlsen and Kramnik being somewhat defined by similar results at that time at least.

Interesting two of these have had or have been world champions and have both evolved their positional play into more a tactical style. Magnus with great effect so that his games look very different than they did just a couple of years ago. I doubted this was a smart move and Magnus has proven otherwise.

<AylerKupp: <<Jambow> Seems this fact might indeed make catching cheaters more difficult.> But you promised no more inane questions this evening!!! :-)>

Ok I asked 1 more but I also answered it to my own satisfaction at least so does it still count :0[

Thanks for your insightful answers.

Apr-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <Perhaps you should read the entire post and try to understand it before you jump to conclusions. I clearly said that 50 games had been played and 16 were decisive. So 16/50 = 32%. Of these 16 decisive games 7 were won by White and 9 were won by Black, and 7 + 9 = 16.>

<AylerKupp>

And then I stated 'these patzers etc...' because, obviously, Black only has 1 win after 76 games. White vs Black = 16-1

So where you got the info that Black won 9 games?

Apr-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  perfidious: <WPE>, perhaps it is from a similar set of 'cognitive faculties' to those alluded to by Mortimer in your quote above: <AK the prolix> obviously gets paid by the word.
Apr-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <perfidious>

Well, he meant that SF won 7 games and Leela 9 games out of 50.

When I saw 'Black won 9 games' I made that reference 'confused.'

But apparently he did not get it and wrote:

<Perhaps you should read the entire post and try to understand it before you jump to conclusions. I clearly said that 50 games had been played and 16 were decisive. So 16/50 = 32%. Of these 16 decisive games 7 were won by White and 9 were won by Black, and 7 + 9 = 16.

So if one of us is in a state of ultimate confusion, or is arithmetically challenged, I don't think that it's us patzers.

But I like your avatar.>

Apr-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<WorstPlayerEver> because, obviously, Black only has 1 win after 76 games. White vs Black = 16-1. So where you got the info that Black won 9 games?>

From here: https://chess24.com/en/watch/live-t.... I found the round-by-round format confusing and hard to follow, the table at the bottom of the page made it seem to me that the first line is the score for Stockfish and the second row is the score for LeelaC0.

But you're right, looking at https://www.chessbomb.com/arena/202... makes the round-by-round format clear. Thanks for the correction.

So, for an update, after 79 completed games LeelaC0 leads by a score of 41.5 37.5, and there have been 18 decisive games, 17 of them won by White. And White's score % is 60.1%, Black's 39.9%.

Assuming, of course, that I did the math correctly.

Apr-18-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<perfidious> <AK the prolix> obviously gets paid by the word.>

You finally caught me! But it sure took you a long time to figure it out, didn't it?

Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <AylerKupp>

I won't visit Chess24.

Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <walter86>Well, that explains it. If he did read then I am truly impressed by his speed-reading ability. For most posters reading my posts would have taken a lot longer. And I am also impressed by his fortitude, most posters would not have been able to stomach them.
Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <<Jambow> Yes and I get that answering questions about individuals generically is all but impossible and I wouldn't expect you or anyone else to have a ready answer.>

I suppose I could have said something like "Not every question necessarily has an answer". But such a short and succinct reply would have been oh so out of character for me. :-)

<Some players like Levon Aronian if memory serves correct had a much larger % of wins with white and draws with black with Carlsen and Kramnik being somewhat defined by similar results at that time at least. >

I don't know about Aronian (2,814 games, since 1993) or Kramnik (2,890 games, since 1988) but a few days ago, for a completely different purpose, I downloaded all 2,378 of Carlsen's games since 2000 (1,493 of them at Classic time controls) from the 365Chess database and calculated several statistics. And there didn't seem to be a significant difference in Carlsen's scoring % at all time controls or at Classic time controls only, and his White / Black scoring % is not much different from the expected 55% / 45%. Although, not surprisingly, the % of draws at Classic time controls is noticeably higher than the % of draws at all time controls since presumably the players will make a smaller number of errors at Classic time controls.

<At all time controls> (2,378 games):

No. White wins = 750 (31.5%)

No. Black wins = 626 (26.3%)

No. draws = 1,002 (42.1%)

White / Black scoring % = 52.6% / 47.4%

<At Classic time controls only> (1,493 games):

No. White wins = 431 (28.9%)

No. Black wins = 341 (22.8%)

No. draws = 721 (48.3%)

White / Black scoring % = 53.0% / 47.0%

Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <WorstPlayerEver> Why won't you visit Chess24?
Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  WorstPlayerEver: <AylerKupp>

I don't like the attitude of these people.

Apr-19-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <WorstPlayerEver> Is there another chess site that you can recommend for viewing live chess games?
Apr-20-20  Jambow: I looked at Magnus over a period of three years some while back and during that period he and the two afore mentioned players were drawing at a much higher % with black vs white and their respective scores were not 55%/45%. That being said it seems to me that Magnus has started winning with black more often than previously. It may have been an anomaly or a short term trend just something that stood out to me at the time.

In retrospect I may have been or may now be conflating decided games with their scoring, as it has been a few years. It would be very easy to have 47% results and very few decided games indeed. Matter of fact as I type this I'm guessing that is probably true and roughly 55%/45% might in fact be true

I'm too lazy and disinterested to revisit it in earnest but appreciate your data and have always operated under the presumption of facts are more important than feelings. I'm satisfied that the first move advantage is a reality and not by and large an artifact of human psychology. Truly engines are what convinces me the most, as they are not named DeepFreud or StockJung after all.

Sometimes my biting sarcasm comes across as more mean spirited than it really is intended. This is especially true when going from broken English to ASCII and back. Could be a data transmission anomaly. So if I give you grief about your authorship of some of the lengthiest novels on cg.com know it is not malice on my part. I might even have un-diagnosed tourette syndrome? My coworker friend John said I can't believe what you say over the radio, to which I quipped you should hear what I don't say...

Thanks again...

Go Alpha Zero!!!

Apr-23-20  SChesshevsky: Interesting video of Leela - SF game analysis that seems to demonstrate how SF horizon can really be taken advantage of.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2F...

May-03-20
Premium Chessgames Member
  keypusher: Here's an article by Kramnik about AlphaZero playing no-castle chess against itself.

https://www.chess.com/article/view/...

It features an absolutely astounding game, also covered in an agadmator video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mOq...

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 37)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 36 OF 37 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.


NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific player only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!
Home | About | Login | Logout | F.A.Q. | 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 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC