Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Stockfish 19

stockfishchess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–165 of 165 posts

Re: Stockfish 19

#161

Post by jan_m_savage »

SwellJoe wrote: post #128
jan_m_savage wrote: post #42

I am a fairly good player but after playing 22000 games, I came to the conclusion that ideas and strategies from chess are context-dependent and don't much transfer to real life. I'd rather spend all that time reading up on game theory and play some fun video games, like Red Dead Redemption.

I don't play games for them to "transfer to real life". I play games for fun. Chess can be fun, it has an interesting history and the strategy of various kinds of play open up to you as you play/learn more, it has a structured competition community so you can go places and play with other real people and win fabulous prizes (not really; even some of the best professional players also have real jobs). It's played worl…

I live my life such that the boundary between fun, work and thinking is usually fuzzy and blurred.

So, while I did play chess for fun, after a while it became boring--but I also impute this to my ADHD, perhaps for others it might not stale.

I would not mind a game or two with an interesting opponent, but playing daily is out of the question for me anymore. Time has opportunity cost, right?

Re: Stockfish 19

#162

Post by jan_m_savage »

10xDev wrote: post #117
jan_m_savage wrote: post #42

I am a fairly good player but after playing 22000 games, I came to the conclusion that ideas and strategies from chess are context-dependent and don't much transfer to real life. I'd rather spend all that time reading up on game theory and play some fun video games, like Red Dead Redemption.

Zugzwang is everywhere.

Eh.. it did not originate in chess, this Zugzwang. It's a fairly well-known mathematical entity, goes by the name of Optionality. If you need to fly tonight, and the airliner knows it, they can charge you very high prices: you have no optionality.

Nassim Taleb say a lot on this in his Anti-fragile.

Re: Stockfish 19

#163

Post by jan_m_savage »

globular-toast wrote: post #146
jan_m_savage wrote: post #42

I am a fairly good player but after playing 22000 games, I came to the conclusion that ideas and strategies from chess are context-dependent and don't much transfer to real life. I'd rather spend all that time reading up on game theory and play some fun video games, like Red Dead Redemption.

Why would you play 22000 games if you didn't enjoy it? Are you saying you went through all of that because you thought it would be good for you?

My comment may have been too terse. I didn't mean I didn't enjoy or else I wouldn't have played. I did, but it became stale after so many games and regularly defeating 2000+ opponents in bullet chess. The time and energy needed to reach 2500 is not worth the goal.

Re: Stockfish 19

#164

Post by binarymax »

crystaln wrote: post #160

My favorite chess quote: "The ability to play chess is the sign of a gentleman. The ability to play chess well is the sign of a wasted life." I find this to be very valid.

Is doing something you love, and practicing to the point of expertise, wasting your life? Replace chess with playing an instrument, or basketball. This quote is just exclusionary.

Re: Stockfish 19

#165

Post by adgjlsfhk1 »

reddit_clone wrote: post #147
adgjlsfhk1 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Leela odds bots are working on a similar problem: beat humans starting down material. It's roughly grand master level starting down a rook, and for fast time control even starting down a queen

Unfortunately Chess (unlike Go) doesn't have a good handicap system. When playing without a piece (or two) it is not chess anymore OR it doesn't really matter.. During how many games does Queen's rook come into play during early middle game? Go, on the other hand has a nice handicap system (which doesn't change the nature of the game too much). One can have a fighting chance against a much stronger player with enough…

the rook is fairly useless early game (which is why rook and knight odds are surprisingly close), but the queen actually does a lot in the early midgame (just mostly not by moving). The queen is usually keeping a bunch of squares indirectly defended, the trick is that the queen starts in a pretty good position and is much more mobile, so its importance doesn't come from where it is, but where it could be in 2 movies
Post reply on HN