Try your luck then... what are you waiting for?
Chances are that against a non-woodpusher you will get a good kick in the butt, though...
One has to be completely naive to run an engine in that position, since it has been played more than one hundred times (most recent case being Morozevich- Nakamura from the FIDE GP in Thessaloniki).
Factly, 11.0-0-0 d5 is a slight inaccuracy- Black usually plays 11...Rc8 first, which he can follow-up with ...d5 next move (say after 12.h4) and win something resembling half a tempo.
I'll have to look that up in that other DB you referred me to. But you think Mr. Morrow wasn't running an engine? Right now Stockfish has 3 or 4 White responses as dead even at best. Most interesting might be 14. Nf5 g6
Try your luck then... what are you waiting for?
Chances are that against a non-woodpusher you will get a good kick in the butt, though...
Why would my chances be any worse than Mr Morrow's? His USCF/OTB ratings and mine are both in the 1700s. And I've also played in the US Correspondence Championship (qualifying round) *before* the prevalance of databases and engines.
Sigh ... seems like blumzovich thinks he is the first to have the belief that religious adherence to a good engine will be more than good enough against a decent centaur player. Why don't you go over to ICCF, play some decent players, and then maybe you'll find out how powerful your silicon idol is. There seems to be no point in anyone trying to have a conversation and argue otherwise when, regardless of the argument, all you come back with is "engines are always right, my engine gives this number".
Why would my chances be any worse than Mr Morrow's? His USCF/OTB ratings and mine are both in the 1700s. And I've also played in the US Correspondence Championship (qualifying round) *before* the prevalance of databases and engines.
I'm curious though, do you actually have any experience of playing ICCF correspondence chess in the engine era?
He never claimed here he is not using an engine, and- for the last time: Whatever Stockfish or Houdini claim in the opening phase is hardly relevant.
I have recently met a Ruy Lopez position where Houdini claimed some -0.85 advantage to Black, and factly Black had to play with extreme accuracy for many moves to avoid being crushed, and equalize the chances FOR REAL. At OTB play I would strongly urge Black to avoid this "advantageous" position at all costs- chances are that he would probably lose every single game from there.
What you will realize at ICCF is a sad truth: A patzer with an engine is still a patzer. He must learn a few things first in order to improve, but using your mentality, I'm afraid he will learn them the hard way (or never).
One has to be completely naive to run an engine in that position, since it has been played more than one hundred times (most recent case being Morozevich- Nakamura from the FIDE GP in Thessaloniki).
Factly, 11.0-0-0 d5 is a slight inaccuracy- Black usually plays 11...Rc8 first, which he can follow-up with ...d5 next move (say after 12.h4) and win something resembling half a tempo.
I've found a draw between Bologan and Ivanchuk from 2012 (albeit blindfold) featuring 11...Rc8 instead. And now in that forced line I cited beginning 11...d5 White is emerging +0.30 at depth 27 with 14. Bg2. Which is where if I cared to continue the process, I would back up and more deeply investigate 11...Rc8
Why would my chances be any worse than Mr Morrow's? His USCF/OTB ratings and mine are both in the 1700s. And I've also played in the US Correspondence Championship (qualifying round) *before* the prevalance of databases and engines.
I'm curious though, do you actually have any experience of playing ICCF correspondence chess in the engine era?
No, not in the engine era. I entered a US Correspondence Championship qualifier in the engine era, then chose not compete when I saw USCF/OTB C-players sporting 2300+ ICCF ratings -- that's just downright farcical.
He never claimed here he is not using an engine, and- for the last time: Whatever Stockfish or Houdini claim in the opening phase is hardly relevant.
I have recently met a Ruy Lopez position where Houdini claimed some -0.85 advantage to Black, and factly Black had to play with extreme accuracy for many moves to avoid being crushed, and equalize the chances FOR REAL. At OTB play I would strongly urge Black to avoid this "advantageous" position at all costs- chances are that he would probably lose every single game from there.
What you will realize at ICCF is a sad truth: A patzer with an engine is still a patzer. He must learn a few things first in order to improve, but using your mentality, I'm afraid he will learn them the hard way (or never).
I admit: I'm a patzer with an engine.
The position after white's sixteenth is the critical one. So far, white is scoring massively (+9 =8 -0 out of 17 games), and what's worse, nobody cares about your Stockfish evaluation. If you want to really find out what's happening here, you have to work for a few days at it, using your engine, your brains, and your knowledge. Omitting one of these three ingredients, or using poor quality ones, will result in total failure.
The position after white's sixteenth is the critical one. So far, white is scoring massively (+9 =8 -0 out of 17 games), and what's worse, nobody cares about your Stockfish evaluation. If you want to really find out what's happening here, you have to work for a few days at it, using your engine, your brains, and your knowledge. Omitting one of these three ingredients, or using poor quality ones, will result in total failure.
Touche!
He never claimed here he is not using an engine, and- for the last time: Whatever Stockfish or Houdini claim in the opening phase is hardly relevant.
I have recently met a Ruy Lopez position where Houdini claimed some -0.85 advantage to Black, and factly Black had to play with extreme accuracy for many moves to avoid being crushed, and equalize the chances FOR REAL. At OTB play I would strongly urge Black to avoid this "advantageous" position at all costs- chances are that he would probably lose every single game from there.
What you will realize at ICCF is a sad truth: A patzer with an engine is still a patzer. He must learn a few things first in order to improve, but using your mentality, I'm afraid he will learn them the hard way (or never).
+1
offtopic but Wolff Morrow is a badass name.
In the ancient Olympics in Greece they would have running competition for various distances.
Then in more modern times someone had a bike. One could ride a bike faster and longer distances than a runner could run.
The Olympic Committee recognized this and there were events where using a bike was allowed. In other words they saw that it was cheating to use a bike. Some have better bikes than others so it is an unfair advantage.
I want to compete in some so called "bike events" but I have a ten year old bike that is even a little rusty. Why don't I get another bike so I can compete? Because these bike events are cheating anyway so do I have to cheat to compete?
Bike events as used by dishonest runners are distracting from the honest runners who won titles and tournaments before the use of bikes was allowed.
I am skilled in running and challenged one of the best bikers to a 5 kilometer run but the so called champion biker did not respond.
You know these people who use bikes--it is like a drug to these people. They are so used to cheating by using a bike that they do not know how to run anymore.
You know when the Olympics changed the rules so as to "purpetuate that these new people are not cheats is just not good enough, and does nothing to change my stance of the matter."
Why doesn't blumzovich challenge Wolff Morrow to a game in this variation on chess.com? Make it unrated so you can use engines. If you can't prove what you are saying, then you should not accuse someone of having crappy opening analysis.
It's still crappy analysis because of the lack of detail. He should have at least addressed ...h6 in his notes, instead of just sprinkling ! around. Yeah I did that too, but I'm trolling on chess.com, not writing a feature for the USCF's website. IM Pfren's comments were much more helpful, and we would never have gotten them without me trolling.
BTW I'd never be caught dead playing this sort of thing as Black.
blumzovitch my wayward friend, listen to what David_Star is telling you.
Your presentation was mean-spirited and that was not necessary and in the end you really did not prove your point.
You got some interesting comments from pfren however.
Do not assume an old published rating or even a new published rating is indictitive of the current strength of a player. Especailly when the two ratings are from a different type of chess.
Look at my blitz rating [this is an example] do you think that rating is equal to my correspondence rating? Also, do you think that the blitz rating reflects my blitz play? [the answer is "no" to both questions.]
Finally, do you think being a "troll" is something good?
One has to be completely naive to run an engine in that position, since it has been played more than one hundred times (most recent case being Morozevich- Nakamura from the FIDE GP in Thessaloniki).
Factly, 11.0-0-0 d5 is a slight inaccuracy- Black usually plays 11...Rc8 first, which he can follow-up with ...d5 next move (say after 12.h4) and win something resembling half a tempo.