Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Nick v Dagh fun game
1 2 3 Previous Next  
- - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 22:52 Upvotes 1
We're bored with all the rubbish coming from Hyatt so we've decided to start a fun game:

[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "Sept 2013"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]

1. e4 *
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 22:52
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "Sept 2013"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]

1. e4 c5
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 22:54
rnbqkbnr/pp1ppppp/8/2p5/4P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQKB1R b KQkq - 0 2


[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "Sept 2013"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 22:58
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "Sept 2013"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 22:58
rnbqkbnr/pp2pppp/3p4/2p5/3PP3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNBQKB1R b KQkq - 0 3


[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "5"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 *
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 22:59
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "5"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4

rnbqkbnr/pp2pppp/3p4/8/3pP3/5N2/PPP2PPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 4
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 23:00
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "7"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 *

rnbqkbnr/pp2pppp/3p4/8/3NP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKB1R b KQkq - 0 4
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 23:01
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "7"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 23:02
rnbqkb1r/pp2pppp/3p1n2/8/3NP3/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R b KQkq - 0 5


[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "9"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 *
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 23:02
[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "9"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 23:02
rnbqkb1r/1p2pppp/p2p1n2/8/3NP3/2NQ4/PPP2PPP/R1B1KB1R b KQkq - 0 6


[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "11"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Qd3 *

:twisted: definitely a fun game!
Parent - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 23:04
Ouch! I will have to think about that.

Fun??? Yes, let's have some fun :smile:
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-03 23:10
Lukas??? What says the cluster?
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-03 23:18
Oh great, now I have to play a Freestyle champion AND the Rybka cluster :grin:
Parent - - By turbojuice1122 (Gold) Date 2013-09-04 03:32
Don't forget about Nelson! :twisted:
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-04 11:12
Dagh is (was? :grin:) of course the world master in the Najdorf, especially with the black pieces.  As black he is the only person I saw that ever defeated Eros in his own favourite opening with the white pieces.  He even spooked Nelson/Anson enough into playing 1.h3 against him in a Freestyle final!  This necessitates a crazy move like 6.Qd3, which incidentally my book scored 80% as white with in Sedat's last Super League 3, but just watch as Dagh demolishes it here.
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-04 20:27
He didn't spook us at all.  We took a calculated risk that our book was vastly deeper in h3 than his, and such an unconventional opening might spook him.  He passed the test with an easy draw.  It's never a bad thing to draw Dagh, even with white pieces.
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-04 21:34
"spooked"  past participle, past tense of spook (Verb)

Verb

1.Frighten; unnerve.
2.(esp. of an animal) Take fright suddenly.


:twisted:
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-04 23:15
I know the definition.  We tried to spook him.  He didn't spook.  Neither did we.
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-05 00:15
1. h3 was epic. It could send all kinds of signals, and I wouldn't have much of a clue about which were intended.

1) "Are they trying to make me nervous due to fear of ending on the losing end of such a provocative move?" -- faultily adjust by either becoming even more nervous, or trying to convince myself I am not nervous, thus blocking or sanesthetizing my normal mindset.

2) "Are they trying to disrespect me and make a fool of me for everybody to see?" -- faultily adjust by trying to make an unwarranted "in your face" move myself.

3) "Are they trying to signal fear and make me overconfident and thus likely to fall into a deeply prepared "trappy" line?" -- faultily adjust by becoming too paranoid and timid.

4) "Are they trying to undress me by demonstrating that I weaker than them outside my studied lines?" -- faultily adjust by beginning to doubt myself.

5) "Are they trying to confuse me about all of the above?" -- faultily adjust by thinking in circles.

And we can continue 5 with me leveling myself to a similar 6 and 7 etc., leading to a complete meltdown. Then we come to

Infinity + 1 (or we could say aleph one) : Trying to reset my mind and ignore all of the above. But then we may arrive at

Infinity + 2) "Are they trying to freeze my mind during a faulty reset?" -- faultily adjust by adopting frantic thoughts.

Infinity + 3) "Are they trying to send me into an endless loop of frantic and paralyzed states of mind?" -- faultily adjust by trying in vain to invent an escape from an inescapable loop.

Eventually, I have no option but to think: "Who ARE these guys? Am I playing the Devil?"

All because of 1. h3!

It is not unreasonable to think that Nelson and Anson and Yingheng could consider a version of the above (it's somewhat easier to think this way than to describe the convoluted thinking, lol) and make an intuitive decision (along with other considerations) that I was a good target for such a strike. Would I be able to remain in psychological balance as well as them after 1.h3?

So I would sum up my interpretation of the move as part psychological trick, part due to chessic reasons. And they could likewise think that the move thus had two possible ways of being strong, so that it wouldn't matter too much if one of them would not apply - one out of two would still be plenty good.

My only regret about the game is that we ended up in a line where it soon seemed like neither of us could find anything better than to liquidate into a drawish position. Because this made the game less of an epic story. But it's still fun to think about. We should have more games like this.
Parent - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 04:32
You prove my point.  It was a good idea.  Obviously my chess contribution to the team was zero in that game, but my instinct for psychological operations was conceptually correct.  You get it: we tried to blow your mind.  I still think that was the right idea.  Execution was not as good.  Lesson: next time, don't bluff quite as much.  We definitely had more book than you but it wasn't nearly enough because h3 is a drawish opening and you were, at the time, one of the most dangerous as well as fundamentally sound guys on the circuit.  Had we won it would have been glorious.  We never considered the risk of defeat, really.
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-04 23:17
By the way, could you repost his best game ever?  The one with the deep, deep, deep knight move, as I recall it?  Want to see what my book says about it.  I'm sure it was a great move, just want to review what others did in that position afterwards.
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-04 23:54
This was the game I was referring to Nelson:

[Event "5th Freestyle Final"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.03.23"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Rodo"]
[Black "Flying Saucers"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B90"]
[WhiteElo "2534"]
[BlackElo "2444"]
[PlyCount "74"]
[EventDate "2007.03.25"]
[EventType "rapid"]

4nr1k/4bppp/3p4/1N3PP1/q1n1P2P/1pB5/1P6/1QKR3R w - - 0 31


1. e4 {13} c5 {5} 2. Nf3 {10} d6 {6} 3. d4 {9} cxd4 {4} 4. Nxd4 {7} Nf6 {15} 5.
Nc3 {19} a6 {13} 6. Be3 {12} e5 {28} 7. Nb3 {11} Be6 {13} 8. f3 {13} Be7 {16}
9. Qd2 {9} O-O {14} 10. O-O-O {11} Nbd7 {6} 11. g4 {19} b5 {12} 12. g5 {13} b4
{7} 13. Ne2 {14} Ne8 {8} 14. f4 {15} a5 {12} 15. f5 {15} a4 {10} 16. Nbd4 {30}
exd4 {47} 17. Nxd4 {18} b3 {8} 18. Kb1 {16} bxc2+ {13} 19. Nxc2 {15} Bb3 {19}
20. axb3 {18} axb3 {8} 21. Na3 {9} Ne5 {9} 22. h4 {20} Ra4 {20} 23. Bd4 {21}
Qa8 {29} 24. Qe3 {15} Kh8 {13} 25. Bb5 {704} Ra5 {25} 26. Bc3 {158} Rxb5 {77}
27. Nxb5 {63} Qa2+ {95} 28. Kc1 {21} Nc4 {9} 29. Qd3 {25} Qa1+ {13} 30. Qb1 {13
} Qa4 {14} 31. Nd4 {1189} d5 {30} 32. Rh3 {155} Bd6 {18} 33. Rf3 {55} Ne5 {34}
34. Rff1 {27} Nc7 {1060} 35. h5 {14} Rc8 {948} 36. f6 {1127} gxf6 {228} 37. Kd2
{212} dxe4 {315 ' Rodo abbandona} 0-1

When I tried to replay this win against Suj (Mission Control) a year or two later he deviated with 31.Na3 (that game ended as a draw but should have been 1-0) which might be better than 31.Nd4, I guess.
Parent - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-05 00:25
Yes, at the time I didn't know whether 31.Na3 might refute the line. When I looked Playchess things up some years later, it seemed like people had found a pretty much unavoidable refutation line that I had not considered back then. Today, I looked at those 30000 recent games you linked to, and it seems like some people still tried the line. Perhaps later Rybkas and Houdini etc. have had new thoughts about some endgames, etc.
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 01:33 Edited 2013-09-05 16:04
Interesting.  It's amazing how the brilliancies of yesteryear turn into elementary wins with better tools!  Rodo simply blundered away a possible win, and then blundered away a draw.

31.Na3   64%  58% draws  < certainly offered better chances
31.Nd4?   32%  50% draws  < played

32.f6      31%  56% draws
32.Rh3   35%  49% draws  < played; reasonable move
32.exd5  32%  46% draws

33.Rf3    33%  42% draws  < Houdini prefers 33.Nxb3 Bf4+ 34.Kc2 Ned6 35.Qa1 Qe8 36.Re1 =; but Rf1, Rf3, Re1 and Ne2 are all rated 0.00 too

34.Rff1?   22%  39% draws  < this was the decisive blunder; Nc7! was a brilliancy with Rybka 2.3.2a, now it is merely the only move...Rf2, Rh3, Re3 and Rg3 all appear to hold the draw
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-05 14:23
Thanks for those insights.  In any case it really was a great game, I would hope that it appears in the book on Eros that his dad wrote about him.  I have a recollection that Dagh wrote somewhere (or told me) that the rook exchange sac was a novelty he had had up his sleeve for some time and was waiting to uncork at the right moment.
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 16:09
Can you imagine what could have been done in 2007 with Houdini as the engine on 32 cores, with my current book?  Cripes, anything less than 15/17 would be a sign of incompetence, hardware/ISP problems or just boredom with winning so easily so often.  The hobby has made a lot of progress.  Looking back at today from 2020 I hope we'll have the same impression again.
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-05 16:34
15/17 doesn't sound unreasonable.  For 2020 and beyond, just wait until we get these quantum computers perfected.
Parent - - By turbojuice1122 (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 20:03
I think that the timeline for quantum computers will be pushed back from the mainstream.  First, the "CPU's" are quite difficult to create effectively.  Second, graphene transistors are showing an enormous potential--they recently tested one and showed it had a clock speed of 427 GHz!  They figure that with only thousands of these running in a microchip, that will create speeds of several THz.  With the possibility of this occurring by the end of this decade, that will be a very sharp leap above Moore's Law.
Parent - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-05 20:25
Silicon does seem to be on the way out as a semiconductor material for computers.

I like the idea of a quantum computer specialized for chess, they are getting better (eg. D-Wave http://blogs.nature.com/news/2013/05/quantum-computer-passes-speed-test.html) but it's like the old days before the general purpose computer, where the computer was designed to do a specific task, like an ASIC.
Parent - - By Alkelele (****) Date 2013-09-05 00:36
I didn't do a full analysis, fark that!

My considerations:

1) If you give me a normal opposite castled dragon after 6...g6 (by later playing Qd3-d2), with my having a7-a6 for free, I think I would be fine, but I should be careful not to blindly follow "weird" engine recommendations, but try to look into the classical black plans. That would be a lot of work. And I think we could still easily end up in a position where our best play is some rather dull stuff that is just slightly stronger than normal because of the little extra move a7-a6.

2) If I go proper Najdorf with 6...e5, I guess that is fine.

3) I don't care too much about weird 6...Nbd7 lines.

4) But with 6...e6, you may be able to use your queen on the third rank a bit better, dunno. So I decided that that would be something fun to investigate, without risking too much.

[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "11"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Qd3 e6

rnbqkb1r/1p3ppp/p2ppn2/8/3NP3/2NQ4/PPP2PPP/R1B1KB1R w KQkq - 0 7
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-05 00:47
Thanks, this will be interesting, I was expecting g6.  I don't really have much to say about the position yet (except the white Q has possibly entered the fray too early :lol:) as I'm still in book on auto-pilot. However, to give you some Nelson-ish stats from my book after 7.Be2 I have for white 75.8% (1579 white wins), 35.9% (draws) and 24.2% (black).

[Event "Nick v Dagh"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Nick"]
[Black "Dagh"]
[Result "*"]
[PlyCount "11"]

rnbqkb1r/1p3ppp/p2ppn2/8/3NP3/2NQ4/PPP1BPPP/R1B1K2R b KQkq -


1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Qd3 e6 7. Be2 *
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 16:16

> However, to give you some Nelson-ish stats from my book after 7.Be2 I have for white 75.8% (1579 white wins), 35.9% (draws) and 24.2% (black).


Evidently you've run a Monte Carlo on this position and most of those games are proprietary!  Either that, or a very large number of them are from July-August 2013, which I haven't incorporated yet.
Parent - - By Nick (*****) Date 2013-09-05 16:26
Not too far from the truth :lol:  I'm using a specific set of games for this game against Dagh.  Historically, as you well know, 6.Qd3 is not a +70% move.

A while back I created a cluster-aware (but not MPI) version of cutechess-cli, I used to have access to a lot of cores (alas no longer).  Anyway, with the gui I wrote I can start book matches spread across all the remote cores I have access to, or start specific position matches.   The gui passes the engine names and tc to the remote nodes.  My favourite book editor is Aquarium so that drives everything as a master book.  I create extracts of that in ctg and polyglot format - the polyglot books are the ones that get ftp'd by the gui for the cutechess-cli book matches, as they are much easier to use with cutechess-cli than Aquarium *.hsh or Chessbase *.ctg books.

All of my remote cores run on Linux and I wrote a specific Linux chesserver to serve engines on them, not for the cutechess-cli matches but to allow them to be hooked up together in IDeA.  I found out the hard way that Linux is a much better environment than Windows to run hyperthreaded 1-cpu engines.  This environment is all a few years old now, heavily lacking in cores and won't help me much against an experienced centaur like Dagh though :lol:
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-05 16:56
Sounds pretty cool.  I defer to your authority in this position, then!
Parent - - By Antares (****) Date 2013-09-05 22:46
Was a little curious who "Dagh" is and found this little classic interview with all the (so called) Freestyle-All-Stars. :lol:
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-06 01:53
We didn't call ourselves All-Stars, but when we faced each other we knew when we were up against amateurs and mediocre players and when we were up against formidable players.  Over a period of tournaments you learn who is who.  Some crack under pressure, some don't have books or weak hardware, some would get into time trouble and blow it, others just blundered and made the wrong move by accident.  The best players do amazing things, like get into time trouble and suddenly play brilliant moves to close out a game with seconds left.  Or win effortlessly while still in book.  Or spend over a half-hour thinking about a position that everyone kibitzing says is dead lost, and finding a way to draw that nobody could see.  Those Freestyle tournaments were intense experiences.  Anybody in computer chess now who missed them when they were in full swing has missed out on what I think was the absolute zenith of our hobby.  Imagine over 50 such games in progress simultaneously!  Those were great days.
Parent - - By Chaotic Chess (****) Date 2013-09-06 02:36
Nelson write a book on freestyle chess, you have the signs and passion of a good writer. You even have all the materials scattered over RF. :smile:
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-07 03:04
Aw, shucks.  Nobody would buy the book.  Everyone who read it would read pirated editions.  And then I would face a heap of abuse, accusations and kicks to the nuts.  That's the nature of computer chess.  (I suppose that's why I love it so much.  I just love those paralyzing kicks to the groin.)  Japanese proverb: Deru kugi wa utareru.

Maybe the best format for a book on Freestyle would be fiction.  That way you could take artistic license and simplify some things while avoiding the accusation that you were trying to glorify or trash this or that person.  But it is still a very tough book to write because the heart of it would be the adrenaline-pump of a real tournament, which is a gripping experience to those in the hunt but dry as dust to anyone who isn't enthralled or has tried and been dusted.
Parent - By Chaotic Chess (****) Date 2013-09-07 03:21
lol, seriously you have market for this. Imagine those people reading the book with their engines running in the background using their tablets or phone. In my opinion many will be interested with the book because at club level they will realize they can play superhuman or high level chess and at par against GM opposition.
Parent - By Ozymandias (****) Date 2013-09-07 12:51
"Anybody in computer chess now who missed them when they were in full swing has missed out on what I think was the absolute zenith of our hobby."
Yeah, rub it in, why don't you? :mad:
Parent - By Chaotic Chess (****) Date 2013-09-06 02:50
I have seen this before, they are actually the established "superstar" of freestyle chess
Parent - - By Ozymandias (****) Date 2013-09-07 13:37
In reply to the question, why do stronger OTB players under-perform in Freestyle events?
"Whatever the reason is, we are so far yet to see a GM step forward and give an explanation from "their" point of view."
IMHO this sheds light into the more important mystery, why doesn't Freestyle achieve any recognition at all?
Parent - - By Kappatoo (*****) Date 2013-09-07 14:10
Here is an unpopular answer to both questions: Because the role of the human - aside from buying powerful hardware and putting together a good opening book - is really far less important than many 'freestylers' think.
Parent - - By Ozymandias (****) Date 2013-09-07 14:49
A human adds up to 150 ELO to the machine, book included.
Parent - - By Kappatoo (*****) Date 2013-09-07 14:58
Well, I disagree.
Parent - - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2013-09-07 14:59
You're both right.  150 ELO is correct for the very best players.  For most, it's far less.
Parent - - By Kappatoo (*****) Date 2013-09-07 15:09
I think there is no freestyle player who can outperform an unaided top engine by 150 points, given equal hardware and book.
Parent - - By Ozymandias (****) Date 2013-09-07 16:31
If you insist on taking away one of the player's weapons... why no cripple the machine, too?
Parent - - By Kappatoo (*****) Date 2013-09-07 16:34
Sorry, I don't understand. What weapon?
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Nick v Dagh fun game
1 2 3 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill