Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: A simple opening trick

Author: Ricardo Gibert

Date: 12:05:18 10/06/03

Go up one level in this thread


On October 06, 2003 at 14:39:57, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On October 05, 2003 at 13:43:33, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>
>>There was a discussion about the value of playing oddball lines by amateur
>>programs to avoid the effective book lines of the stronger programs i.e.
>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?319397. I thought about this a
>>little and a trick occurred to me that should work on most programs e.g.
>>Ruffian.
>>
>>The easiest way to explain it is to jump into some examples:
>>   1. e3 e5 2. e4
>>   1. c3 e5 2. c4
>>   1. d3 d5 2. d4
>>   1. d3 e5 2. d4
>>
>>What is this? Isn't White just dumping a tempo? Yes, but the idea is for white
>>to get the computer opponent out of book while retaining the advantage of
>>hundreds of years of opening theory for your own program!
>>
>>It can be carried out with 2 possible motives in mind:
>>1- Reach a playable middlegame with a huge time advantage on the clock.
>>2- Play a sharp gambit defense in reverse. This is the idea of 1.d3 e5 2. d4
>>i.e. 2...exd4 3. Nf3
>>
>>I would assume somebody has thought of this before and that some engines are
>>able to handle this easily. In fact, an engine that can't I would say has a bug
>>IMO. Which engines are able to cope with this trick effectively?
>
>I don't at the moment.  I did several years ago, however.  The idea is to
>simply "flip" the board by changing the color of all pieces, and then swapping
>everything on rank 1 with rank 8, rank 2 with rank 7, etc.  Now, in the above
>you end up with e4 e5 (or whatever) with white to move rather than black.  You
>find the move then "flip it" back to black to move.
>
>I quit doing it when I added book learning, as it caused some massive grief,
>because even though it had found a move as book by the above trick, I didn't
>do the trick in the book learning code itself as it was complicated.  But it
>could be done.
>
>It wasn't that unusual for programs to handle this years ago.  I started doing
>it in Cray Blitz when humans did that to it (before it was cray blitz) in the
>late 1970's.  It was a known "trick" that worked well.  We picked up
>transpositions back then because we used the same hash signature approach I
>use today, where many programs did not.  IE Sargon actually had a "tree" for
>their book and changing the order meant both orders had to be entered into the
>book or it wouldn't find the transposition.  Dan/Kathe eventually went to the
>same hash signature approach everyone uses today, and I'd guess they found the
>same problem with e3 e5 e4.
>
>However, I saw a variation of this in the 1996 WCCC event with the "Ruy Lopez,
>Crafty variation."  e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6 Bc4.  That took everyone out of book,
>and yet they played the obvious developmental moves such as Nf6 and so forth.
>I didn't plan it, as my "random 0" mode does a search on all book moves and
>takes the one with the best score, and Bc4 came out better than Ba4 or Bxc6.
>It turned out to be _much_ better as we went 20+ moves in book while everyone
>else was out instantly.  We ended up playing 3 programs (at least) with a 2:1
>time odds advantage (40 moves in 2 hours vs 40 moves in 1 hour) or whatever the
>time control was.  It was funny.
>
>What was _really_ funny was I had posted such a game where Crafty beat chess
>genius, in my office, while tuning up for the game, and I had pointed out how
>stupid the move looked to me.  But I forgot about it, and it started happening
>in Jakarta.  I didn't know anything about it until one morning on ICC, Bruce
>Moreland was asking everyone "What should I play after e4 e5 Nf3 Nc6 Bb5 a6
>Bc4?"  That was the first I had heard about it.  No internet access from the
>Jakarta playing hall so news came out of there a day or too behind.
>
>Books can be funny things...

By coincidence, one try I did against Ruffian went 1.e3 e5 2.e4 Nf6 3. Nc3 Bb4
4.a3 Bc5 reaching the same position in reverse! It continued 5.d4 exd4 6.Na4
playing a Two Knights defense where Black cannot play the normal Two Knights
move Bb4+ due to the extra move a3.



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.