Wow going through these games and the comments and it's crazy how much the tech has grown in just 8 odd years. I sometimes tend to forget that chess engines are relatively young, given how powerful they are now and these vids are great to get some perspective.
Thanks a lot for taking the time to play the computer, John. Greatly appreciated! :) I see you uploaded two more matches. Will make sure to watch those as well. Thanks once more for sharing with us! :)
I'm impressed by the draw. I've watched other TH-camrs take on Computer4-IMPOSSIBLE and manage draws or wins in blitz, but never in longer time controls. I like the variety of videos your making right now. Seriously, you really need to look into setting up a way for your viewers to donate to your channel. There are a number of options out there, and I actively support a number myself. I watch a few channels a day, some livestreaming, etc., and rarely seem to use other entertainment mediums these days. So honestly, it's the least I, or other equally dedicated viewers, could do.
+Eric Jones Thanks, Eric! Glad you like my content. There is a donate link on my main TH-cam page, but I may have to make it more conspicuous. Here's the direct link: www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=Vpg0wUb6E5eFXz94FKrm7KqkvnJjClJK9GT4fltWuk28ZhbLCPlG9FmB320&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8d0b9dcb01a9b6dc564e45f62871326a5e Thanks in advance if you choose to donate something :)
Blarpacho I've played many that think on my time... I was assuming the Chess.com computer did as well. That would indeed give it an advantage, otherwise, I see your point.
+John Bartholomew Almost! Nd5 was not such a bad transition, you were winning after that. You only had to follow accurately :) 19...Qa5 was a bad move not only from a human perspective. Stockfish also laughs at it :D P.S. As far as I know Computer4-Impossible on chess.com plays at strength around 2400.
Hey john, how do you know when to play a3 and then b4 (for the minority attack), or Rb1 and then b4? I've never understood the subtle differences. Thanks!
+Jack Kruger Usually Rb1 should be preferred. The theory is that after b2-b4 you may want a2-a4 in support in order to advance b4-b5, but if you've already played a2-a3 you'd have to move the a-pawn again.
+Dimitar Bushkalov Thanks for watching, Dimitar! Rd1 at that juncture would have been a convenient move, yes. I may have missed that ...Bxe3 could be met by Rxd4 in that case. Good spot!
In the following it took the White Human Player almost 48 hours to come up with a promising if not winning strategy on move 24. Black was Solver Labs Chess version 2.2.1 Free Chess BlackBerry - Date : May 1-2, 2014. E80 KISS (King Indian Saemisch System): 1.e4 d6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 c6 5.f3 Qa5 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Nb6 8.Nge2 h5 9.a3 Bg7 10.b4 Qa6 11.c5 Nc4 12.Qb3 Be6 13.d5 cd 14.ed (14.Nd4 dc 15.Ne6 Qe6 16.Bc5 b6 17.Bd4 Rc8) 14......Nd5 15.Nd5 Bd5 16.Bd4 Bd4 17.Nd4 dc 18.bc Rc8 19.Qc3 Rg8 20.Nb3 Rd8 21.0-0 (21.a4 f6 22.0-0 g5) 21......Qa4 22.Bc2 e6 23.Rfe1 Rd7 24.Qf6 Na3 25.Nd4 Qb4 26.Bg6 Qb2 27.Rad1 Rc7 28.Re6 Be6 29.Qe6 Kf8 30.Qd6 Kg7 31.Bh5 Kh7 32.Bg4 Rg4 33.fg Rc8 34.Nf5 Rc6 35.Qe7 Qf6 36.Qe3 Nc4 37.Qh3 Kg8 38.Qg3 and now Black can afford Rc5!
John at 18:57 why didn't you go for g3? I would also definitely have gone to f1. As you pointed out if the bishop tries to play for discovered check, you can advance with tempo and the king is more helpful in the center. Also you checked his king forward making him more active, but all that was probably due to time trouble.
Thanks again for these great videos. I'm obviously missing something, but at 26:08, why couldn't you go with 28 Bxg3 Nxg3+ 29 Kg1 Nxf1 30 Nc7 ? And incidentally, definitely making paypal contribution.
+czarmogul Hey, czarmogul! That's an interesting line and a good question. I think I "believed" the computer that this would be good for Black, but I should have considered it. Maybe after 30...Ne3 or 30...Nd2 in that case?
+Ryan Phelps there is a line in the KID and i dont know the exact order of moves. but black will play bishop g4 then h3 kicking blacks light squared bishop. the position im thinkinking of the best move without a doubt in my mind is bishop back to c8. witch is weird. but black does this to keep hold of the b7 pawn. i refer you to the guy by the name of roman dinzidinzischvilli he has a instructive video on the Kings Indian defense that you can by if you just type his name into your browser. i would suggest ordering his videos. very detailed videos on opening ideas.. he has done extensive analysis of the kings Indian defense. in the late 80s he was ranked in the top 10. my point that i was trying to make is that the position im talking about is so closed that black can afford developing the bishop back to c8. however when u turn a engine on it will say bishop h5. a little dubious. white can then play queen b3 then after black protects the pawn on b7 with rook b8 making such move is reassuring white that he does have the advantage. so keeping white squared bishop for black on the c8 h3 diagonal is important... counter intuitive yes. if you looked at the position im thinking of. it makes sense once you see the idea behind it.
+Devvan Butler amazing i can spell dinzidinzischvilli without looking it up. i wanted add to this while im thinking of roman. he also couched gata kamsky. in mid 90s. he won alot of tournaments. if i wanted to look in my treasure trove of books i never study i could find the direct reference to the tournaments. another thing i wanted to add is gata kamsky is one of the most creative players alive.
+Ryan Phelps My understanding is that closed positions often require long-term plans that exceed the search horizon of engines, since they can only really calculate concrete variations instead of thinking in abstract, general terms like humans can.
+Ryan Phelps Ryzalis is correct. Closed positions somewhat negate the computer's brute-force calculation advantage, as long-term planning is often more important than individual moves.
I've always been frustrated by the fact that computers don't have to take any time to calculate. Seems like the programmers could make them play more humans, ie. have them run more time off in tough situations (giving you more time to figure out your next move), and having them play less than accurate moves when in time trouble just like humans do.
+Jason Rawls Yes, this is the most difficult part about playing engines. It's one thing to play an engine at (say) 2400 level, but it's another when that 2400 engine doesn't need to use any time to play like a 2400!
+Jason Rawls we made engines for analysis,, we made them because they can access the database and calculate lines in no time with accuracy,,, there is no point in letting them make inaccurate moves but most of the chess websites use their own engines(weak) or else no one would play komodo or stockfish
+mcpartridgeboy There have been some matches like that taking place recently. Check this article: www.chess.com/news/komodo-vs-humanity-nakamura-will-give-it-a-go-6514
Wow going through these games and the comments and it's crazy how much the tech has grown in just 8 odd years. I sometimes tend to forget that chess engines are relatively young, given how powerful they are now and these vids are great to get some perspective.
Indeed! :) And thanks for watching!
Thanks a lot for taking the time to play the computer, John. Greatly appreciated! :) I see you uploaded two more matches. Will make sure to watch those as well. Thanks once more for sharing with us! :)
+aryesegal1988 Thanks for watching!
I'm impressed by the draw. I've watched other TH-camrs take on Computer4-IMPOSSIBLE and manage draws or wins in blitz, but never in longer time controls. I like the variety of videos your making right now. Seriously, you really need to look into setting up a way for your viewers to donate to your channel. There are a number of options out there, and I actively support a number myself. I watch a few channels a day, some livestreaming, etc., and rarely seem to use other entertainment mediums these days. So honestly, it's the least I, or other equally dedicated viewers, could do.
+Eric Jones The computer takes the same amount of time in all the time controls. Playing a longer game is easier to win/draw than in blitz.
+Eric Jones Thanks, Eric! Glad you like my content. There is a donate link on my main TH-cam page, but I may have to make it more conspicuous. Here's the direct link: www.paypal.com/us/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_flow&SESSION=Vpg0wUb6E5eFXz94FKrm7KqkvnJjClJK9GT4fltWuk28ZhbLCPlG9FmB320&dispatch=5885d80a13c0db1f8e263663d3faee8d0b9dcb01a9b6dc564e45f62871326a5e Thanks in advance if you choose to donate something :)
I see it now. I guess on my large monitor it got lost in the background image. Thanks! I'll be sure to donate now!
Blarpacho I've played many that think on my time... I was assuming the Chess.com computer did as well. That would indeed give it an advantage, otherwise, I see your point.
lichess analysis of this game: en.lichess.org/oTwLaAeM#0
+John Bartholomew Almost! Nd5 was not such a bad transition, you were winning after that. You only had to follow accurately :)
19...Qa5 was a bad move not only from a human perspective. Stockfish also laughs at it :D
P.S. As far as I know Computer4-Impossible on chess.com plays at strength around 2400.
+John Bartholomew
Average centipawn loss less then 20 is very good.What do you think john ?
+Maruf Sarkar Not too bad for a faster time control, yes :)
+Tara Prasad Tripathy Thanks - glad you enjoyed it!
Thank goodness, I love these
Looking forward to more man vs machine videos.
+Mike M. Glad to hear you like these :)
Hey john, how do you know when to play a3 and then b4 (for the minority attack), or Rb1 and then b4? I've never understood the subtle differences. Thanks!
+Jack Kruger Usually Rb1 should be preferred. The theory is that after b2-b4 you may want a2-a4 in support in order to advance b4-b5, but if you've already played a2-a3 you'd have to move the a-pawn again.
Awesome, thanks a lot!
almost everyone and there mother. ROFLMAO....good game john. had been waiting past couple hours for your video of the day. thank you. lol... funny guy
John, thanks for the instructive video. What do you think about Rd1 on 27:00?
Many thanks
+Dimitar Bushkalov Thanks for watching, Dimitar! Rd1 at that juncture would have been a convenient move, yes. I may have missed that ...Bxe3 could be met by Rxd4 in that case. Good spot!
Thanks John. Just watched your video with the exchange sac. against an American GM. Awesome win!
+Dimitar Bushkalov Thanks! Do you mean the Scandinavian game against GM Naroditsky?
Yes, exactly. Name of the game was "Pawn structure" :-)
+Dimitar Bushkalov Definitely :)
In the following it took the White Human Player almost 48 hours to come up with a promising if not winning strategy on move 24. Black was Solver Labs Chess version 2.2.1 Free Chess BlackBerry - Date : May 1-2, 2014. E80 KISS (King Indian Saemisch System): 1.e4 d6 2.c4 Nf6 3.Nc3 g6 4.d4 c6 5.f3 Qa5 6.Be3 Nbd7 7.Bd3 Nb6 8.Nge2 h5 9.a3 Bg7 10.b4 Qa6 11.c5 Nc4 12.Qb3 Be6 13.d5 cd 14.ed (14.Nd4 dc 15.Ne6 Qe6 16.Bc5 b6 17.Bd4 Rc8) 14......Nd5 15.Nd5 Bd5 16.Bd4 Bd4 17.Nd4 dc 18.bc Rc8 19.Qc3 Rg8 20.Nb3 Rd8 21.0-0 (21.a4 f6 22.0-0 g5) 21......Qa4 22.Bc2 e6 23.Rfe1 Rd7 24.Qf6 Na3 25.Nd4 Qb4 26.Bg6 Qb2 27.Rad1 Rc7 28.Re6 Be6 29.Qe6 Kf8 30.Qd6 Kg7 31.Bh5 Kh7 32.Bg4 Rg4 33.fg Rc8 34.Nf5 Rc6 35.Qe7 Qf6 36.Qe3 Nc4 37.Qh3 Kg8 38.Qg3 and now Black can afford Rc5!
I think he was ready to march the 3 pawns
Chess.com computer plays wired, I have seen other videos with people playing thing, and it's opening is crazy.
John at 18:57 why didn't you go for g3? I would also definitely have gone to f1. As you pointed out if the bishop tries to play for discovered check, you can advance with tempo and the king is more helpful in the center. Also you checked his king forward making him more active, but all that was probably due to time trouble.
+JayLue Hm, I guess I didn't see how g3 Bd2 would benefit me.
I thought closing the g3 hole and giving your king a good square on g2 would be a good idea.
John, after Black has played ...h6, do you think it makes sense to go for 0-0-0, trying to take advantage of the h6 hook ?
+Laurent SaltofLife Yes, that does make more sense! White could certainly play this way if they want a sharper game.
Thanks again for these great videos. I'm obviously missing something, but at 26:08, why couldn't you go with 28 Bxg3 Nxg3+ 29 Kg1 Nxf1 30 Nc7 ? And incidentally, definitely making paypal contribution.
+czarmogul Hey, czarmogul! That's an interesting line and a good question. I think I "believed" the computer that this would be good for Black, but I should have considered it. Maybe after 30...Ne3 or 30...Nd2 in that case?
Why is it that computers don't play closed positions well?
+Ryan Phelps closed positions are more straightforeword, less room for tricky tactics. computers thrive in open bishop positions with bishop pairs
+Ryan Phelps there is a line in the KID and i dont know the exact order of moves. but black will play bishop g4 then h3 kicking blacks light squared bishop. the position im thinkinking of the best move without a doubt in my mind is bishop back to c8. witch is weird. but black does this to keep hold of the b7 pawn. i refer you to the guy by the name of roman dinzidinzischvilli he has a instructive video on the Kings Indian defense that you can by if you just type his name into your browser. i would suggest ordering his videos. very detailed videos on opening ideas.. he has done extensive analysis of the kings Indian defense. in the late 80s he was ranked in the top 10. my point that i was trying to make is that the position im talking about is so closed that black can afford developing the bishop back to c8. however when u turn a engine on it will say bishop h5. a little dubious. white can then play queen b3 then after black protects the pawn on b7 with rook b8 making such move is reassuring white that he does have the advantage. so keeping white squared bishop for black on the c8 h3 diagonal is important... counter intuitive yes. if you looked at the position im thinking of. it makes sense once you see the idea behind it.
+Devvan Butler amazing i can spell dinzidinzischvilli without looking it up. i wanted add to this while im thinking of roman. he also couched gata kamsky. in mid 90s. he won alot of tournaments. if i wanted to look in my treasure trove of books i never study i could find the direct reference to the tournaments. another thing i wanted to add is gata kamsky is one of the most creative players alive.
+Ryan Phelps My understanding is that closed positions often require long-term plans that exceed the search horizon of engines, since they can only really calculate concrete variations instead of thinking in abstract, general terms like humans can.
+Ryan Phelps Ryzalis is correct. Closed positions somewhat negate the computer's brute-force calculation advantage, as long-term planning is often more important than individual moves.
Computer4-IMPOSSIBLE is not accepting challenges right now. Try challenging another member.
I believe that lichess' stockfish level 8 will crush computer 4, but I'm not so sure.
+isaac10231 it will
I've always been frustrated by the fact that computers don't have to take any time to calculate. Seems like the programmers could make them play more humans, ie. have them run more time off in tough situations (giving you more time to figure out your next move), and having them play less than accurate moves when in time trouble just like humans do.
+Jason Rawls Yes, this is the most difficult part about playing engines. It's one thing to play an engine at (say) 2400 level, but it's another when that 2400 engine doesn't need to use any time to play like a 2400!
+Jason Rawls we made engines for analysis,, we made them because they can access the database and calculate lines in no time with accuracy,,, there is no point in letting them make inaccurate moves but most of the chess websites use their own engines(weak) or else no one would play komodo or stockfish
The 1 person who disliked is upset that they're stuck in the past
we all know top engines beat any player, how much extra material would a 2700 + player need to win most games ?
+mcpartridgeboy There have been some matches like that taking place recently. Check this article: www.chess.com/news/komodo-vs-humanity-nakamura-will-give-it-a-go-6514
I really hate this computer impossible, it always goes after my pawns... really annoying engine