Human versus Machine

Do you claim you can win from the starting position against a top engine which is not crippled in some way?

What other way there is of winning against a top engine?

Well, heads up play against a top engine is something where the top professional chess players in the world cannot win, because the engines have got too strong. Nakamura is a very, very strong (not to mention extraordinarily fast) player who knows a few things about chess computers, and he had a hard job getting half points with a handicap.

Therefore I would like you to confirm (or not) that you can do better than Nakamura.

Of course, I am going through your game 16 from Human vs Machine Part II. Funny position with your king almost at the centre of the board and black two moves from promoting. But the checkmate stopped everything, beautiful game.

How about a PGN/diagram of one heads up game against Stockfish that had a happy result?

I told you, Nakamura opens the game as soon as this is possible: just look at his last handicap game against Komodo with the handicap knight on b1 for pawn on c7. he got crushed in less than 20 moves, because he opened the game with d5, a very wrong positional decision.

Here is how I have handled the very same imbalance:

See the difference?

Thanks Torrubirubi.

You are a great man, thanks also for your reviews.

But see what I got by people who have not read my books: 1-star reviews, just because:

"Complete waste of time/This book is a complete waste of time. The author knows nothing about chess and the book is really unhelpful."

Someone, probably Chesster/Jim, just posted this about 'The Secret of Chess'.

Of course, the book will not sell after all.

Why should people be so mean?

Read the book and then comment.

Above game is featured in the 3rd part of 'Human versus Machine'.

And here one more test position from the positional test suite of my new book on Fischer, maybe you will be interested to take a look: https://www.amazon.com/Best-Move-Fischer-Lyudmil-Tsvetkov/dp/1976748585 

The point is to find 15. Bf6!(which SF finds, or maybe first a4 b4, which does not change the overall character of the position and assessment) Bf6, and then 16. Bd5!, which is the real key move, and which SF fails to see. It prefers 16. Nd5? instead, which after 16...Bd5 17. Bd5 should only lead to a draw in an ending with opposite colour bishops.

Any engine seeing that sequence?

Are you, as a chess player, able to find it?

Somebody should tell Nakamura about your books. With his skills and your insights he would crush the engines on a regular basis.

In this game 13. is not Kh1.  Just another set-up.

Interestingly (and rather irrelevantly!) Stockfish 7 on 4 overclocked (4.4 Ghz) cores swaps back between Bxf6 and a4 on that position but sticks on a4 for a long time from 12 seconds past 996 seconds (depth 36).

Yes, I think he chooses from the possible moves the one that suits him, if not straightforward invent it (like Kh1). After all, he spend on this 16 hours a day, by his own admission.

Better you should use SF 8, like in the game. It is free after all.

Lyodomil, of course engines can be beaten in a handicap game (although this is very challenging for an unassisted human). When I said a PGN, I meant of a game of standard chess from the starting position.

Stockfish 7 likes Kh1 from about 50,000,000 nodes: are you sure Stockfish 8 never likes it?

I posted a screenshot with considered moves by 20 mil. nodes. Of course I don't have quad-core. You can try it yourself. Is it a problem for you to download SF 8?

No, I installed it earlier. I find dramatically different results to you. Stockfish 8 thinks Kh1 is best across a wide range of times, but realises the position is very bad. (Same choice up to 3 minutes on 3 threads, with depth 30). (Click image)

Probably my machine is too slow, you have 5.5 Mil. nodes/sec, while I have 0.8  Mil. nodes/sec.

Certainly so.

a4 and Bf6 are both playable as first move(a4 b4 just slightly improves white's position, but does not decide the game), the point is to find Bd5! instead of Nd5? on the second/third move, where SF fails.

The point is to find Bd5! here, trading light-square bishops and staying with good knight vs bad black bishop, and not a4 or Nd5.

That is the whole point: the weak light square complex and the bad/hemmed-in black bishop.

Correction, a4 is not playable as first move, as after b4 Bf6 Bf6, the knight on c3 is attacked, and white should play Nd5, which is weak and antipositional.

So, only winning move is Bf6, followed by Bd5.

I don't know what you are talking about: Kh1 where?

You are  famous chess/chess engine dilletante.