What you described AlphaZero as doing in these games is called "positional sacrifice" and while AlphaZero's sacrifices are amazing in depth and even mysterious to GMs, the idea is hardly new. The more advanced you are as a player, the more likely you'd make such positional sacrifices, and human GMs make them regularly. A positional sacrifice is not "opposed" to tactics as if you have to choose one over another. Rather, a positional sacrifice is an advanced type of tactics which becomes relevant when more basic tactical opportunities - like winning a piece for nothing - are unavailable. You don't see such basic tactical play in the AlphaZero games not because tactics is unimportant, but because AlphaZero and Stockfish are super-tacticians who avoid tactical blunders that can be exploited immediately. So what you called "tactics" are the basic material concerns that must be examined first, before you consider the more advanced positional sacrifices.
Unusually high quality post for these forums.
agreed. and likes it said, its nothing new. positional play is nothing more than truncated ideas too deep to comprehend in brute force. like tactical shortcuts that must be considered when nothing concrete counteracts them.
Nc3 always, if you read this little post you would see that there is no "unfairness" to the principle variations found in that post. Stockfish doesn't exist in those lines, only Alpha Zero. Furthermore, and most importantly, if AZ was a farce, how could it have completely dominated the fields of Shogi and Go just days before? Do you believe that an ai engine dominating all 3 of these most complex games is a farce just because the stockfish moves chosen seemed subpar to your evaluations. More chess players should be aware of the significance found BEFORE AZ vs SF, when AZ dominated the fields of even more complex games! Unfortunately, AZ was still learning when it was cutoff. What did AZ learn? That is important! I know this answer and it is GREATLY to my advantage.
To the chess world:
1. AZ vs AZ was a fair match! (not SF)
2. AZ dominated 3 complex gaming fields (not just chess)!
3. AZ games are beautiful, modern yet romantic.
Conclusion: "Currently, there is such an unfortunate lack of understanding regarding AZ and its actual goals and accomplishments. If a player wants to obtain understanding beyond the current human champions, perhaps he should attempt to learn from the players which are much stronger (3000+) than the human masters of today. If a player understands what Alpha Zero understood, he would greatly benefit. If a player understands where Alpha Zero was going with its training (finding the true global minimum) and was able to use the data to project that conclusion, he could even play stronger than Alpha Zero!
Clearly, "There is far too little being read into these games", this is clear on many levels as I have yet to run into but a handful of individuals who truly understand merely the facts, and even less who can understand beyond them and extrapolate unto understanding.
If you think AZ might have something to teach you, check out that post and share your insight!