Move 1 poll: Everyone vs. Stockfish

[Batalov]

My optional move is "1. resign"

[LaurV]

[edit: crosspost, didn't see new page, I was replying to MooMoo's post.
Nice one Serge! ]

Nice link, thanks for sharing it.

I said many times that the "crazy chess" is the only solution to exterminate those rats who use engines to play games on public servers. I am not a web programmer, but if I would be one (and have enough time), or I could associate with one, we would make an internet chess server where the people could come and play "crazy chess". I would take care of the part of maintaining the rules database, and the interface for game selection.

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

I take that as a huge challenge! Even playing as white, I think we all need to ban together with our best chess engines, run them on our fastest computers, and use some human analysis to differenciate between very equal moves to see if we can draw or beat this thing. We would at least have a small chance as white.

(my bold)

Can we be clear on this? We are not allowed to use chess playing software in this first game where we have White, correct?

[gd_barnes]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

(my bold)

Can we be clear on this? We are not allowed to use chess playing software in this first game where we have White, correct?

I agree it was already stated that we would not use software as white. But...I think it would be fun to do use both human and computer analysis as white...call it computer-aided human analysis. It's probably our only chance to beat (or possibly even draw) Stockfish since we have no IMs or GMs on the forum (that I am aware of).

[Brian-E]

Originally Posted by gd_barnes

I agree it was already stated that we would not use software as white. But...I think it would be fun to do use both human and computer analysis as white...call it computer-aided human analysis. It's probably our only chance to beat (or possibly even draw) Stockfish since we have no IMs or GMs on the forum (that I am aware of).

I agree with you about our chances against Stockfish if we don't use computer-aided analysis. The strongest forum member that I know of is FM Vincent Diepeveen, and he has so far shown no interest in any of our voting chess initiatives.

I would like to say, though, that playing chess with the aid of software doesn't interest me. If we drop the rule of "no software help", I'll revert to being a passive and rather indifferent observer. Which is not, of course, to say that others won't still be interested.

[MooMoo2]

Originally Posted by Brian-E

I agree with you about our chances against Stockfish if we don't use computer-aided analysis. The strongest forum member that I know of is FM Vincent Diepeveen, and he has so far shown no interest in any of our voting chess initiatives.

I would like to say, though, that playing chess with the aid of software doesn't interest me. If we drop the rule of "no software help", I'll revert to being a passive and rather indifferent observer. Which is not, of course, to say that others won't still be interested.

No engine analysis is allowed for this game, but if it turns out to be a blowout win for Stockfish, one option would be to include hints in future games. This means that after each move by Stockfish, I'll provide the depth searched, its evaluation (0.41 pawns up, for example), the number of nodes searched, and the move that it's expecting next.

(Personal prediction for this game: 65% odds of a Stockfish win, 30% odds of a draw, and 5% odds of a loss. Most likely scenario is that the forum members will resign at move 34, and Stockfish's evaluation will be a +5.6 pawn advantage at that time.)