I lost the first game, then won the second. Since that was easy, I tried odds of two bishops. But you need to use pieces to trap pieces, and the computer never had the resources to claw away at me before I traded everything away and crushed it with my extra queen. Sometimes I would blunder several pawns or a whole piece. It also makes the game much simpler and straightforward, as there are far less nasty tactics available when the computer only has two rooks available.ĭon’t get me wrong, the computer managed to trick me plenty of times and get pieces trapped. If you manage to trade all your bishops and knights away, stockfish would have 18 points and you would have 27, a 50% advantage. Initially, the opponent has 30 points of material, and you have 39, meaning you have 30% more material than them. Secondly, take every opportunity to trade pieces. Don’t leave pieces unprotected, check for forks and pins, don’t try any crazy tactics.
First, play it safe and try not to make any extreme blunders. I played 10 games and only lost 1 (when I blundered my queen stupidly). The first game I played against stockfish was with queen odds. For further homework, you can try and guess the odds of victory for each game in the picture below. And if you can play chess, I encourage you to guess as to what it would take for you to beat stockfish. But can I win if stockfish is only down a rook? Two bishops? A queen? A queen and a rook? More than that? I encourage you to pause and make a guess. What “odds” do I need to beat stockfish 14 in a game of chess? Obviously I can win if the AI only has a king and 3 pawns. Now that we have all the setup, we can ask the main question of this article:
CHESS CHECKMATE ROOK AND KING CODE
In practice, it would be probably be much lower, roughly equivalent to the odds that there is a bug in the stockfish code that I managed to stumble upon by chance. If I played stockfish, the estimated chance of victory would be 1 in 1.3 million.
If you ask for a game analysis on a site like or lichess, it will compare your moves to stockfish and score you by how close you are to what stockfish would do. When human players train, they use the supercomputers as standards. In chess, AI is already superhuman, and has long since blasted past the best players in the world. Stockfish 14 has an estimated ELO of 3549. Although realistically, the real odds would be less about the ELO and more on whether he was drunk while playing me. Under this calculation, the chance of me beating a 2200 player is 1 in 500, while the chance of me beating Magnus Carlsen would be 1 in 24000. ELO ratings can be used to estimate the chance of victory in a matchup, although the estimates are somewhat crude for very large skill differences. The top chess player Magnus Carlsen is at an incredible 2853. In comparison, a chess master is ~2200, a grandmaster is ~2700. My rating on lichess blitz is 1200, on rapid is 1600, which some calculator online said would place me at ~1100 ELO on the FIDE scale. I mainly just play online blitz and rapid games for fun. I never bothered to learn any openings in real detail, or do studies on complex endgames. I’m better than most of my friends that play, but I never reached my dad’s level of chess obsession. Now I am a fully blown adult with a PhD, I’m a lot better at chess than I was a kid. I still lost a bunch though, because I blundered pieces. The resource imbalance of the missing queen made the difference. When I played “odds of a queen” against my dad, the games were fun again, as I had a chance of victory and he could play as normal without acting intentionally dumb. “Odds of a queen”, for example, refers to taking the queen of the stronger player off the board. When two players with very different skill levels want to play each other, the stronger player will start off with some pieces missing from their side of the board. This is a common problem in chess, with a well established solution: It’s called “ odds”. Not many kids have the patience to lose dozens of games in a row and never even get close to victory. In a purely skill based game like chess, an extreme skill imbalance means that the more skilled player essentially always wins, and in chess, it ends up being a slaughter that is no fun for either player. He was playing local tournaments and could play blindfolded, while I was, well, a child. The problem was that my dad was extremely good. As a kid, I really enjoyed chess, as did my dad.
0 kommentar(er)
