131–140 of 243 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article states that if there are multiple moves the engine recommends, that they all count as the "optimal" move, even if there's an indication of preference by the engine.
I like the idea of not being allowed to use any move the engine would recommend. Blunders only.
I've been thinking about a possible chess variant to eliminate opening preparation drudgery. The Fisher 960 variant tries to do this, but it can be very different from regular chess, and some of the positions are unbalanced. I think we can use the fact that engines know when a position is even. There must be millions of even positions in the first 10 or so moves. Pick one of those randomly, and start the game.
Bishop, Rook, Knight, King, Knight, Rook, Queen, Bishop. Here's the post: https://www.reddit.com/r/chess/comments/yeregq/fischer_rando...
Maybe this should be used as the starting point? Traditional openings would usually give an advantage to White.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The article states that if there are multiple moves the engine recommends, that they all count as the "optimal" move, even if there's an indication of preference by the engine.
I like the idea of not being allowed to use any move the engine would recommend. Blunders only.
It's a cool concept but the first naive thought that comes to mind for me is that white could just easily dominate by taking advantage of the fact that taking a queen is almost always the top engine move. So just by maintaining relative king safety on white's side, you just open your queen early and make sure that every move there onwards hangs your queen in some fashion. It's very easy to hang a queen. You just have…
So you end up in this scenario where both players are taking one another's pieces while leaving their queens en prise the whole time. Is it a draw, or is there some clever way to break this loop?
Next up: Basilisk Chess Two players compete to win a chess game, where you only win if you work tirelessly to play perfect chess moves on every turn (as determined by benevolent artificial superintelligence). The loser is tortured in a virtual reality simulation.
If I refuse to play am I also tortured
It's a cool concept but the first naive thought that comes to mind for me is that white could just easily dominate by taking advantage of the fact that taking a queen is almost always the top engine move. So just by maintaining relative king safety on white's side, you just open your queen early and make sure that every move there onwards hangs your queen in some fashion. It's very easy to hang a queen. You just have…
For instance after 1.e3 e6 2.Qh5, White threatens Qxf7+ which would force black to play the top engine move. Then 2...g6 3.Qxg6 is one idea -- but there are two recaptures, fxg6 and hxg6, and only one of them can be the top engine move (hxg6, I'm guessing). So 3...fxg6 probably refutes this idea. But are you sure enough as white to try to claim a win if black goes hxg6?
And after say 1.e3 e6 2.Qh5 g6 3.Qxh7 (avoiding that line and going for material), not only does black not have to care about their rook (white can't take it, it would be the best move), black actually has 3...Qh4 winning -- he threatens 4...Qxf2+, white can't play 4.Qxh4 as that's the best engine move, and white's queen is threatened twice, so black will be able to take it -- provided he checked this line before the game to know which piece to take with.
Edit: it doesn't actually win, white has 4.Qf5 to defend f2... what a strange game.
Edit 2: once a piece is _en prise_ somewhere, the game can otherwise become somewhat normal as taking it would be the best move and so would moving it to a safe spot - so other moves can be played as usual. But would they be good?
I've been thinking about a possible chess variant to eliminate opening preparation drudgery. The Fisher 960 variant tries to do this, but it can be very different from regular chess, and some of the positions are unbalanced. I think we can use the fact that engines know when a position is even. There must be millions of even positions in the first 10 or so moves. Pick one of those randomly, and start the game.
I think in the context of top level chess, eliminating opening prep is the wrong way to go. And I don't like 960 either for that reason. I think the problem with opening prep today is that there are so many drawish openings and forced draws, constructed repetitions etc. In other words it's just too easy for top players to make a low effort draw. To make top level chess more interesting I have a handful of ideas that…
Is this called "Human" chess because top engine moves would not be humanely possible? I have a low chess rank (900 on chess.com), yet on an okay game 25% of my moves will be "top engine moves": https://i.imgur.com/TGaDtzr.png I could even easily find games where I had 50% of top engine moves. It's really not exceptional. Often the top engine move is the only good move and that only good move is pretty obvious.
It is "Human" chess because you win by forcing your opposition to mess up, instead of pursuing perfection yourself.
You just described all of chess.
That actually looks hilarious, especially the part where checkmating is illegal since it would always be the best move. The first game highlighted is also fun. I'll have to try this next week at the chess club!
With this variant you can win without checkmating: just checking with leaving only 1 forced move is enough to win the game.
It's a cool concept but the first naive thought that comes to mind for me is that white could just easily dominate by taking advantage of the fact that taking a queen is almost always the top engine move. So just by maintaining relative king safety on white's side, you just open your queen early and make sure that every move there onwards hangs your queen in some fashion. It's very easy to hang a queen. You just have…
