Thats a good question!
I have always wondered if someone or a computer maybe, was at a rating of lets say above 5000, what would that look like. How deep would it calculate. What beautiful, deep tactics would it make... or is it even possible, what if there is no real change, what if we have already reached the deepness of chess now with M. Carlsen and Alpha Zero and Stockfish. Ahww chess is beautiful.
A 3000 could easily beat a 2000, but could a 4000 easily beat a 3000?
Sort:
Jun 6, 2018
0
#102
drmrboss wrote:
Chess is so drawish that experts engine testers predict perfects engine elo would be between 3800-4500. It is so easy to draw beyond 3500+ level. There is around 95% draw among top engines in long time control in fair opening book + endgame Table base.
Perfect engines ratings will never beyond 4500 , compared to stockfish. ( current stockfish rating in 16 cores at long time control is assumed 3500).
I think StockFish 9 is rated 3390, I could be wrong. I know the expensive chess programs, like Deep Fritz, which are like $70, say they are 3600 level or something.
Liichess wrote:
Thats a good question! I have always wondered if someone or a computer maybe, was at a rating of lets say above 5000, what would that look like. How deep would it calculate. What beautiful, deep tactics would it make... or is it even possible, what if there is no real change, what if we have already reached the deepness of chess now with M. Carlsen and Alpha Zero and Stockfish. Ahww chess is beautiful.
Even if you can keep calculating deeper and deeper indefinitely, what matter is how it actually affects the result of the game. If 100 moves are all that's needed to perfectly win a game in a specific position, than it doesn't matter whether the opponent can see 1000 or 100000000000000 moves ahead, he will still lose.
EndgameStudier wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
Chess is so drawish that experts engine testers predict perfects engine elo would be between 3800-4500. It is so easy to draw beyond 3500+ level. There is around 95% draw among top engines in long time control in fair opening book + endgame Table base.
Perfect engines ratings will never beyond 4500 , compared to stockfish. ( current stockfish rating in 16 cores at long time control is assumed 3500).
I think StockFish 9 is rated 3390, I could be wrong. I know the expensive chess programs, like Deep Fritz, which are like $70, say they are 3600 level or something.
Nah, stockfish is the best in any rating list. ( around 50 elo better than other two best engines Komodo and Houdini). Around 100 elo better than Fritz.
drmrboss wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
drmrboss wrote:
Chess is so drawish that experts engine testers predict perfects engine elo would be between 3800-4500. It is so easy to draw beyond 3500+ level. There is around 95% draw among top engines in long time control in fair opening book + endgame Table base.
Perfect engines ratings will never beyond 4500 , compared to stockfish. ( current stockfish rating in 16 cores at long time control is assumed 3500).
I think StockFish 9 is rated 3390, I could be wrong. I know the expensive chess programs, like Deep Fritz, which are like $70, say they are 3600 level or something.
Nah, stockfish is the best in any rating list. ( around 50 elo better than other two best engines Komodo and Houdini). Around 100 elo better than Fritz.
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/
Jun 6, 2018
0
#107
Yeah I guess, I just wish that these are the questions that scientist can try and answer not whats up in Mars, its fucking rocks. Move on!
EndgameStudier wrote:
Yes, but you couldn't tell the difference between a 2000 IQ and a 1000 IQ
But the person with 2000 IQ could.
EndgameStudier wrote:
DjonniDerevnja wrote:
Brixed wrote:
A 4000 or even 4 00000000000 rated engine can not beat a 3000 315 out of 316 times. I think the 3000 is strong enough to save more than 100 draws out of 316 against unlimited power. Anish Giri can save 100 draws against whatever you put him up against in a 316 game match. EndgameStudier wrote:
A 3000 could easily beat a 2000, but could a 4000 easily beat a 3000?
It'd be the same result.
Statistically speaking, in a long match between a 3000 and a 4000, the 4000 would win hundreds of games in a row before the 3000 won a single game (1 win for every 315 losses, to be precise).
The 3000 would certainly put up a stronger fight (and the games would last longer) than a 2000 vs. 3000, but the 4000 would still dominate all the same.
That's the point I was trying to make. There's a certain level, where the players are so good, that the game will be equal, regardless of the "difference". There's a finite number of moves in chess, but an infinite number of possible ratings. If one player can see a billion moves ahead, and the other can see a trillion moves ahead, the game will still probably be only 200 ish move anyway, so it doesn't really matter.
But why is 3000 elo anywhere close to that level of "good"? The Alpha-zero match demonstrated, if nothing else, that there is still a lot of room for improvement for modern engines. They aren't anywhere close to being perfect chess-playing machines, so why would 3000 - or even 4000, for that matter - be the point where someone can force a draw against perfect play?
Jun 6, 2018
0
#110
macer75 wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
Yes, but you couldn't tell the difference between a 2000 IQ and a 1000 IQ
But the person with 2000 IQ could.
I think you can
Liichess wrote:
macer75 wrote:
EndgameStudier wrote:
Yes, but you couldn't tell the difference between a 2000 IQ and a 1000 IQ
But the person with 2000 IQ could.
I think you can
You've chosen a very risky username, my friend...
Well seeing the highest IQ ever was 210 (Kim Un Yung or something like that. Just google highest IQ ever and he'll come up. He's quite an interesting guy) I doubt a 2000 IQ and a 1000 IQ will ever meet- in a similar sense that a 3000 and a 4000 will likely never exist or never meet.
Still an interesting question, from my weak knowledge of chess and from the fact higher up engines almost always draw, no, I would imagine the difference would be perhaps noticeable over 100-200 games, but not significant enough that in one game you could tell one player is 10000 points above another.
Still an interesting question, from my weak knowledge of chess and from the fact higher up engines almost always draw, no, I would imagine the difference would be perhaps noticeable over 100-200 games, but not significant enough that in one game you could tell one player is 10000 points above another.
I'd say Liichess is less a risky username, more a suicidal one.
Jun 6, 2018
0
#114
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
Liichess wrote:
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
4000 and 3500 (or 3000, according to the OP's original question) is a pretty big difference though. My objection to the "more draws at higher levels" argument is that yes, games between two 3000-level engines are drawish, but that does not mean that that same would apply to games between a 3000 and someone or some entity 1000 points higher.
Jun 6, 2018
0
#116
macer75 wrote:
Liichess wrote:
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
4000 and 3500 (or 3000, according to the OP's original question) is a pretty big difference though. My objection to the "more draws at higher levels" argument is that yes, games between two 3000-level engines are drawish, but that does not mean that that same would apply to games between a 3000 and someone or some entity 1000 points higher.
Yes but then how would the 400 be able to beat the 3000. Wit it also making near perfect moves?
Jun 6, 2018
0
#117
But what if stockfish is fake at sets the standard. What if there is something much better?What if stockfish is just really bad but still better than us.
superchessmachine wrote:
macer75 wrote:
Liichess wrote:
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
4000 and 3500 (or 3000, according to the OP's original question) is a pretty big difference though. My objection to the "more draws at higher levels" argument is that yes, games between two 3000-level engines are drawish, but that does not mean that that same would apply to games between a 3000 and someone or some entity 1000 points higher.
Yes but then how would the 400 be able to beat the 3000. Wit it also making near perfect moves?
Its possible that those tiny inaccuracies could add up over time, but prolly be a draw in most cases
Liichess wrote:
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
Lets put it another way, if a car going 299 mph and another 300 mph, both crash, would you be able to see which one was originally going faster?
superchessmachine wrote:
macer75 wrote:
Liichess wrote:
Its kind of like 2 cars, one is driving 99 mh and the other 100mh its going to take a while to see the difference in who is faster right? its the same with chess. One who is rated 4000 and one who is 3500 its ging to take them a few 100 games maby to see whos better not just a couple of games.
4000 and 3500 (or 3000, according to the OP's original question) is a pretty big difference though. My objection to the "more draws at higher levels" argument is that yes, games between two 3000-level engines are drawish, but that does not mean that that same would apply to games between a 3000 and someone or some entity 1000 points higher.
Yes but then how would the 400 be able to beat the 3000. Wit it also making near perfect moves?
The same way a 3000 would beat a 2000. By making better moves. Doesn't have to be perfect or even near perfect, just a lot better. Two very good computers will draw most of their games becaue they are so similar in ability. But there are a lot fewer draws when a 2000 plays a 3000. So I would guess there would be a lot fewer draws when a 3000 plays a 4000.
I think the answer to the original question is yes, a 4000 could easily beat a 3000 but the scale is a little different. There is a thousand points difference in both situations but the percentage of increased ability is less in the second situation.
Chess is so drawish that experts engine testers predict perfects engine elo would be between 3800-4500. It is so easy to draw beyond 3500+ level. There is around 95% draw among top engines in long time control in fair opening book + endgame Table base.
Perfect engines ratings will never beyond 4500 , compared to stockfish. ( current stockfish rating in 16 cores at long time control is assumed 3500).