Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Fat Fritz 2.0 (Read 9547 times)
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2046
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #30 - 03/03/21 at 10:20:13
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 03/02/21 at 09:45:33:
However we also see that now simple amateurs like myself are using engines to destroy dubious openings which before couldn't be refuted clearly see e.g. http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2019/06/computers-achieve-autonomy-part-2.html You need a very modern engine to show you the path to a clear advantage in those openings but if you have such modern engine then it is not very difficult to memorize it as an amateur. So a modern engine (last 2-3 years) has closed the door for many positionally dubious openings at least for standard chess played at expertlevel or higher.

Yes I agree that Leela is still nice to have for the openings. Still Stockfish made enormous improvements in that domain lately so Leela is not anymore that dominant. In other words Stockfish is sufficient in most cases and for sure if you are an amateur below expert-level.


Nice that SF works well in openings too now Smiley

My memory has never worked very well for precise moves - or precise anything for exams etc - which is definitely a drawback these days!

Still useful to go through my openings and make sure they're not critically dependent on that.

I definitely agree about all the moderately dubious openings about though.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #29 - 03/02/21 at 20:57:28
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/02/21 at 20:19:08:
Sure Gabuzyan checked his openings with an engine, my point was when the engine told him not to play 1.f4 but to play 1.d4 instead, he didn't listen to it.

I never heard about anybody choosing their first move based on what the engine shows. In fact the first move says nothing about the usage of an engine. I answer 1.d4 always with f5 despite engines don't like it at all but it would be a very big mistake of my opponents to think that I didn't use the strongest engines very extensively.

The choice of an opening is often something very complex at masterlevel.
- What is the evaluation of the engine?
- Did my opponent recently play this opening or not?
- Does my opponent have a lot of experience with this opening or not?
- Did I recently check this opening or not?
- Which games could my opponent know from me about this opening?
- Do I still remember the important details or not?
- Should I play for a win or is a draw sufficient?
- How do I feel/ what is my mood?

Most masters go through such checklist already at home when preparing for the game and when surprised at the board will take a lot of time for their first moves. They make a selection out of their repertoire based on a list of criteria but the evaluation of the engine is definitely part of it. A really losing continuation most professionals won't play but they do variate between moves which are rather close of evaluation.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1493
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #28 - 03/02/21 at 20:19:08
Post Tools
I take one class as 200, e.g. USCF class A 1800-1999, class Expert 2000-2199, class Master 2200-2399, class Senior Master 2400+. However I did underestimate Gabuzyan's performance somewhat so I am closer to three classes below his performance. With titled players the difference between titles is roughly 100, but I don't call these "classes".

Sure Gabuzyan checked his openings with an engine, my point was when the engine told him not to play 1.f4 but to play 1.d4 instead, he didn't listen to it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #27 - 03/02/21 at 18:06:40
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/02/21 at 16:29:05:
I view claims of a revolution in chess openings to be made either by marketing types or by people who spend so much time looking at engine evaluations that they have lost sight of the pragmatic requirement to just play decent moves. In the recently completed Armenian Championship, the winner played 1.c4 twice, 1.b3 twice, 1.e4 once, and 1.f4 once. I guess he did not ask the engine to approve of his openings beforehand. As black he played the Najdorf, but also the Benko Gambit. Since this performance is two classes above my current level, my takeaway is I don't have to worry about whether some 3400-Elo engine thinks those openings are junk. In other words, objectively speaking, subjectivity works fine.

By the way, H.Gabuzyan - L.Babujian, 81st ch-ARM 2021 (Gabuzyan's sole loss) is a fascinating game and a good illustration of how the opening *influences* the game result, but does not directly *cause* it.

I think you are largely underestimating how much those guys know of openings. I see a lot of those guys practicing whole day all different openings so they can switch any time in a tournament and try to poke a hole in the repertoire of the opponent. So I don't bite it that Gabuzyan never checked with an engine any lines after 1.e4, 1.c4, 1.b3 or 1.f4.

Now you claim that his performance is 2 classes above your current level so then you must be a grandmaster and then I need to shut up. Gabuzyan had a performance of 2790 see https://en.chessbase.com/post/hovhannes-gabuzyan-wins-armenian-championship-2021 and as 1 class = 100 points (difference between e.g. FM and IM) then you must be 2590 fide.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #26 - 03/02/21 at 17:49:59
Post Tools
an ordinary chessplayer wrote on 03/02/21 at 16:29:05:
Compared to the best engines, even Carlsen's games are mediocre, so I don't really understand why you added that word.

I use the word mediocre in relation with the openings we as amateurs get or bring ourselves on the board in standard chess. All sort of gambits and special dubious petlines are occurring between amateurs while you almost never see those in grandmaster practice. In fact it is something I also mentioned in my article http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2020/06/chesspub-part-2.html. Only 32% of the openings which I got in my 100 most recent games on the board were more or less covered by chesspub. So it means still for 68% you are left on your own and then a modern engine can be a very useful tool to solve some problems (suppose you have in your next clubchampion-game again the opponent with that annoying side-line which is nowhere properly covered.)
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1493
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #25 - 03/02/21 at 16:29:05
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 03/02/21 at 08:51:44:
I guess most people are interesed in using an engine to analyze their own mediocre played games.

Yes, that's what I want it for. First I analyze using my brain, then I check it with an engine. My interest is not so much finding the best move, but in getting better at finding good moves when I play OTB.

Compared to the best engines, even Carlsen's games are mediocre, so I don't really understand why you added that word.

MartinC wrote on 03/02/21 at 09:13:47:
I wonder slightly about that last. Computers have been more than strong enough to catch any/all realistically soluble mistakes that we make for a very long time now.

Yes, I don't really care what engine I use, they are all good enough and have been for a long time.

I view claims of a revolution in chess openings to be made either by marketing types or by people who spend so much time looking at engine evaluations that they have lost sight of the pragmatic requirement to just play decent moves. In the recently completed Armenian Championship, the winner played 1.c4 twice, 1.b3 twice, 1.e4 once, and 1.f4 once. I guess he did not ask the engine to approve of his openings beforehand. As black he played the Najdorf, but also the Benko Gambit. Since this performance is two classes above my current level, my takeaway is I don't have to worry about whether some 3400-Elo engine thinks those openings are junk. In other words, objectively speaking, subjectivity works fine.

By the way, H.Gabuzyan - L.Babujian, 81st ch-ARM 2021 (Gabuzyan's sole loss) is a fascinating game and a good illustration of how the opening *influences* the game result, but does not directly *cause* it.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #24 - 03/02/21 at 09:45:33
Post Tools
MartinC wrote on 03/02/21 at 09:13:47:
brabo wrote on 03/02/21 at 08:51:44:
[quote author=39293A3C3E2831345B0 link=1613204040/21#21 date=1614674491]My testresults are based on an openingbook specially tuned to see differences between the engines. The openingbook is meanwhile version 8. If you play without such openingbook then you risk to see 100 draws. However I am interested to get the best evaluation for positions I want to study and those are often very unbalanced. I guess most people are interested in using an engine to analyze their own mediocre played games.


I wonder slightly about that last. Computers have been more than strong enough to catch any/all realistically soluble mistakes that we make for a very long time now.

I like playing about with LC0 because you get an unprejudiced viewpoint on opening theory, which is interesting in its own right.

No I don't agree that engines can't learn us anything new compared with versions of e.g. 2-3 years ago.
First there is the aspect of openings in which as engines gain strength are continuously rewriting the repertoires of professional chessplayers which then indirectly impact the millions of people copying those repertoires. In one of my most recent articles I demonstrated the impact of fashion in chess : http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2021/02/fashion-part-3.html

However we also see that now simple amateurs like myself are using engines to destroy dubious openings which before couldn't be refuted clearly see e.g. http://chess-brabo.blogspot.com/2019/06/computers-achieve-autonomy-part-2.html You need a very modern engine to show you the path to a clear advantage in those openings but if you have such modern engine then it is not very difficult to memorize it as an amateur. So a modern engine (last 2-3 years) has closed the door for many positionally dubious openings at least for standard chess played at expertlevel or higher.

Yes I agree that Leela is still nice to have for the openings. Still Stockfish made enormous improvements in that domain lately so Leela is not anymore that dominant. In other words Stockfish is sufficient in most cases and for sure if you are an amateur below expert-level.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2046
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #23 - 03/02/21 at 09:13:47
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 03/02/21 at 08:51:44:
[quote author=39293A3C3E2831345B0 link=1613204040/21#21 date=1614674491]My testresults are based on an openingbook specially tuned to see differences between the engines. The openingbook is meanwhile version 8. If you play without such openingbook then you risk to see 100 draws. However I am interested to get the best evaluation for positions I want to study and those are often very unbalanced. I guess most people are interesed in using an engine to analyze their own mediocre played games.


I wonder slightly about that last. Computers have been more than strong enough to catch any/all realistically soluble mistakes that we make for a very long time now.

I like playing about with LC0 because you get an unprejudiced viewpoint on opening theory, which is interesting in its own right.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #22 - 03/02/21 at 08:51:44
Post Tools
bragesjo wrote on 03/02/21 at 08:41:31:
I have high hopes that both Stockfish and Leela would gain from cooperation. I belive that highly training neural networks are the key to all engines improvments.

By the way I looked again at

https://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404/

And it apears to change a lot every day or week.
Right now Fat Fritz 2 is rated 1 elo higher than Stockfish 13.

Well Stockfish will get much faster access to the best nets with the cooperation and Leela will get now also access to the computers from the Stockfish-team. It will be a gain for both but I do expect Stockfish to win the most from it.

CCRL is showing results on an average modern computer (which most of us can afford) but at timecontrol of 2minutes + 1seconds. That is very fast and mostly faster than what most people are using as analysis. I expect most of us let the engine calculate longer than a second per move. Myself I am using a time-control of 15 minutes + 10 seconds so each game lasts about 1 hour. This is much closer to the speed of analysis I do for my own work. On the other hand the sample of tests is much smaller.

Still using a T40 net while T60 nets are almost a year available, clearly shows that CCRL is lagging behind for Leela.

My testresults are based on an openingbook specially tuned to see differences between the engines. The openingbook is meanwhile version 8. If you play without such openingbook then you risk to see 100 draws. However I am interested to get the best evaluation for positions I want to study and those are often very unbalanced. I guess most people are interesed in using an engine to analyze their own mediocre played games.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
bragesjo
God Member
*****
Offline


CCE at ICCF 2021

Posts: 1752
Location: Eskilstuna
Joined: 06/30/06
Gender: Male
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #21 - 03/02/21 at 08:41:31
Post Tools
I have high hopes that both Stockfish and Leela would gain from cooperation. I belive that highly training neural networks are the key to all engines improvments.

By the way I looked again at

https://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404/

And it apears to change a lot every day or week.
Right now Fat Fritz 2 is rated 1 elo higher than Stockfish 13.
1 elo is within the margin of error.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 1042
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #20 - 03/02/21 at 06:11:04
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 02/13/21 at 12:09:51:
Oh by the way I downloaded last week the most up to date Leela. I ran a new test over 100 games with it against Stockfish 12 and it performed slightly better than the version I've tested in september.
Leela February 2021 - Stockfish 12: 48,5 -51,5
Leela September 2020- Stockfish 12: 47 - 53

There were 13 decisive mini-matches out of 50 (white/ black) in the most recent 100 rapidmarathon. 8 were won by Stockfish and 5 were won by Leela. This is in line with the results shown on CCRL and TCEC. It also shows that in some positions Leela can still add something to Stockfish.


I just finished redoing the tests with Stockfish 13 instead of 12. Same openingbook and the results are impressive.
Leela February 2021 - Stockfish 13: 46 - 54 (Stockfish won 11 opening-pairs but lost here still 3 out of 50!!)
Leela September 2020 - Stockfish 13: 41 - 59 (Stockfish won 17 opening-pairs and lost none out of 50 !!)

It is clear that in the last 6 months both engines made a lot of progress again but Stockfish seems to widen slowly the gap. I guess this probably was an extra reason for Leela and Stockfish to join forces.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
an ordinary chessplayer
God Member
*****
Offline


I used to be not bad.

Posts: 1493
Location: Columbus, OH (USA)
Joined: 01/02/15
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #19 - 02/19/21 at 16:52:24
Post Tools
@Bibs - Good link, thanks for that. The history is more extensive than I knew. It's certainly not a case of oops, sorry, didn't realize.

MartinC wrote on 02/19/21 at 09:36:18:
What's slightly silly about it all is that it would be perfectly reasonable for them to charge for a nice GUI with several of the open source engines properly bundled and trivial installation/support if there's trouble.

That would definitely add value for some. Trying to sell it purely on the (borrowed!) engine like this doesn't look good.


Yes, agreed, doing it without the deception would be reasonable. I found a similar conclusion in the lichess comments, I won't give the author's name in case they don't want to be mentioned here, but it is #49 there.

Quote:
I believed Chessbase's claim that Fat Fritz 2 is a milestone in engine development, done by Albert Silver. After having bought it, I realized that only the neural network is their own work. This neural network seems to be quite useful, but the above mentioned claim is a shame!

At least you get Fritz 17 GUI for the prize (sic) as well, which is useful software. I would not complain, If Chessbase did not claim to have improved the engine.

So there are two issues here: (1) Infraction against the Stockfish developers (partially mitigated afterwards); (2) deception against the customers. Either one by itself would be serious, taken together it's alarming. And as mentioned, totally unnecessary for ChessBase to have done it this way.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Pawnpusher
Senior Member
****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 255
Joined: 01/04/18
Gender: Male
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #18 - 02/19/21 at 10:57:09
Post Tools
I believe we are very close to Stockfish 13 which will be an upgrade in strength.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Bibs
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 2334
Joined: 10/24/06
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #17 - 02/19/21 at 10:48:19
Post Tools
I really think this is a very bad look for Chessbase. Generating unnecessary bad will toward them. Really bad.

No idea about the guy Albert Silver at all. Never heard of him before this nonsense.

My impression is that basically there has been plenty of good will toward the company till now, as the main database is good and used by nearly all. I use CB 15 and have lots of their opening downloads. But this all looks very dodgy.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
MartinC
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 2046
Joined: 07/24/06
Re: Fat Fritz 2.0
Reply #16 - 02/19/21 at 09:36:18
Post Tools
What's slightly silly about it all is that it would be perfectly reasonable for them to charge for a nice GUI with several of the open source engines properly bundled and trivial installation/support if there's trouble.

That would definitely add value for some. Trying to sell it purely on the (borrowed!) engine like this doesn't look good.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: [1] 2 3 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo