Earlier quoted context omitted.
e4, Qf3, Qxf7 looks menacing
I guess after 1. e4 e5 2. Qf3 black can safely play Qf6
True, and as long as there are two ways to take (and there are) Black must be fine.
Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
191–200 of 243 posts
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#192Is it human chess if you have to think like an engine to know what not to do?
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#193Machines would have an even greater advantage here. They know exactly the second best move, and would easily calculate it based on any set of constraints. Humans are worse at the increased complexity
The catch here is that the engine doesn't understand the objective in its search. To the engine, getting the king in check with an obvious response is no issue, in human chess its game over.
My bet (uninformed, very novice at chess) is that it's likely there's guaranteed setups that would always catch an engine.
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#194Now: Human Chess: a variant where you can't play what AI would play. Next: AI that can play Human Chess. After: Human^2 Chess: you can't play what the AI above would play. etc I wonder if this creates distinctly new games at each level, or if it's just nonsense one level down.
Wouldn't human^2 chess be similar to regular chess? The human-chess AI is guaranteed never to play the regular-chess optimal move, so you can get a checkmate by always playing the optimal move (according to the engine). And unlike human chess, there's nothing preventing you from checkmating your opponent. (I believe a chess engine could play human^2 chess exactly like it plays regular chess. A human couldn't because…
[deleted]
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#195Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you deliver checkmate, you lose. You have to instead force your opponent into a situation where they only have one legal move (which is trivially the best engine move).
Not necessarily. There could be two ways to checkmate and you picked the one that was t the top move
I don’t see how one way of checkmating could be worse than another way of checkmating? Do some engines give different scores for different check-mating moves? (Different moves from the same position I mean)
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#196It'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…
But mating is always the optimal engine move. So I'm not sure a huge material advantage is the advantage you think it is.
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#197A simpler variation, that needs no computer to settle disputes, is Veto Chess. In Veto Chess you get one chance per game to veto your opponent's last move, and force them to make a different one. This shares with Human Chess the property that you can win by checking the king such that the response is forced. It may also serve as a handicap system in games between players of widely different strength, where only the w…
Is it stalemate or a loss if an opponent vetos your only legal move?
A loss if you're in check; a stalemate otherwise.
I.e. same as if that move was considered illegal.
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#198I haven’t played chess seriously since I was in high school but I do like collecting hardwood chess boards cus they look great as room decor.
I give them out as gifts too. Everyone loves a chess set.
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#199Machines would have an even greater advantage here. They know exactly the second best move, and would easily calculate it based on any set of constraints. Humans are worse at the increased complexity
But then they'd just always play second best until they at best drew, or (more likely) meet with a forced move that's inherently the best engine move and lose.
You need a different engine that's focussed on not only avoiding conventionally top moves itself, but also forcing its opponent into them.
Re: Human Chess is a chess variant where playing the top engine move is forbidden
#200A simpler variation, that needs no computer to settle disputes, is Veto Chess. In Veto Chess you get one chance per game to veto your opponent's last move, and force them to make a different one. This shares with Human Chess the property that you can win by checking the king such that the response is forced. It may also serve as a handicap system in games between players of widely different strength, where only the w…
I expect that if I were offered a veto against a stronger player, I would not be skilled enough to spot which move to veto, and would probably end up hoarding my veto, like in video games where you have a great-but-rare ability that you keep perpetually in reserve. (“Too Awesome to Use” on TV Tropes. Link omitted - you’re welcome). But then, I’m a terrible chess player.
I'm also terrible; I'd use it when I inadvertently gave my queen away.