AlphaZero (Computer) vs Stockfish (Computer) (2018)

Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players ·

Kibitzing

AlphaZero (Computer) vs Stockfish (Computer)
AlphaZero - Stockfish Match (2018), London ENG, Jan-18
Formation: Queen Pawn Game: London System (D02) · 1/2-1/2

White to move.

ANALYSIS [x]

1/2-1/2

rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1

FEN COPIED

explore this opening	find similar games	219 more AlphaZero/Stockfish games
	PGN: download \| view \| print	Help: general \| java-troubleshooting

TIP: If you register a free account you will be able to create game collections and add games and notes to them. For more information on game collections, see our Help Page.

For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.

PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

May-06-22		FSR: Amazing game! 10.e4!! is a stunning novelty in a well-known position that is previously been reached in many top-level GM games. See Levy Rozman's analysis at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yO_... (start at 20:17).

May-06-22		Clement Fraud: I love games like this: so much can be learned from the Stockfish encounters with AlphaZero. Being of a more lowly playing strength, I had to analyze 10.e4 for some time; in the end I discovered that by capturing the Pawn - 10... dxe4 (followed by 11.Ng5) - White will be able to plant a Knight on e4 ___ thus undermining Black's Queen on c3 (!) How I wish I were able to play like this (in my own competition games)!

May-07-22		0ZeR0: Truly mind-blowing... Some of the stuff these modern engines come up with can only be described as wizardry!

May-07-22		Olavi: I'm afraid that I have to disagree. Once you put 10.e4 on the board, it doesn't take long to see that it makes perfect sense. People tend to be lazy, but 10.e4 is a typical move in such structures, which makes it a bit surprising that it was overlooked. No laws of nature have been disproved.

May-07-22		0ZeR0: <Olavi> If 10.e4 is as natural and commonplace as you claim, than why was it a novelty here? I was able to work out the purpose of the move à la <Clement Fraud>, but I wouldn't say it's completely trivial. With hindsight it's always easier to be less impressed or criticize moves and games than it is to actually play them over the board yourself. I find the move to be a fresh idea and representative of the kind of exciting chess one should aspire to. But to each their own. As for people being lazy... If I am lazy for not immediately grasping that 10.e4 is obvious than so be it. I will also say that I do not play the London System whatsoever either, so if I am merely ignorant feel free to educate me. I'm always eager to learn.

May-07-22		Olavi: <0ZeR0> It's not trivial, but the fact that it wasn't played doesn't mean that it wasn't considered (I correct my 'overlooked'). To see that both e4 captures are bad for black is fairly trivial for a strong player, no A0 strenght Co is needed. In Trompowsky-like b2-gambits the e3-e4 idea has been around for half a century, in fact it looks very much like something Alekhine would look at. There is the slight suspicion that people don't look beyond the Co's first lines when preparing.

May-07-22		0ZeR0: <Olavi> Alright, fair enough. It's clear that you are more knowledgeable about such structures than myself so I appreciate you sharing a bit more. Perhaps my initial statement was a bit overzealous. I am passionate and I get rather excited when something strikes my fancy (maybe you can relate). <There is the slight suspicion that people don't look beyond the Co's first lines when preparing.> I'll admit that sometimes this is the case for myself. Let's just say that I have plenty of room to improve as both a chess player and a person. But I am trying. Such is life.

May-07-22		0ZeR0: Now that I've given some more time to it, the move does look like something that would be right up Alekhine's alley.

May-08-22		fredthebear: 6th tries for White White to move [Opening Explorer] 1) +0.24 (29 ply) 6.dxc5 Qxb2 7.Rb1 Qc3 8.Bb5 e6 9.O-O Be7 10.Ne5 Bd7 11.Nxd7 Nxd7 12.e4 a6 13.Be2 Nxc5 14.exd5 exd5 15.Nb3 Ne6 16.Bd2 Qe5 17.Na5 Ra7 18.Nxc6 bxc6 19.g3 O-O 20.Re1 Qc7 21.c4 Rb7 22.cxd5 Rxb1 23.Qxb1 cxd5 24.Bxa6 2) -0.14 (28 ply) 6.c4 cxd4 7.exd4 Bf5 8.Qb3 dxc4 9.Bxc4 e6 10.Qxb6 axb6 11.Be5 Bb4 12.a3 O-O 13.Bxf6 gxf6 14.Bb5 Rfd8 15.Bxc6 bxc6 16.Rc1 Be7 17.Rxc6 Rdc8 18.d5 exd5 19.Nd4 Bd7 20.Rxc8+ Rxc8 21.O-O Kg7 3) -0.15 (28 ply) 6.Be5 cxd4 7.Bxd4 Nxd4 8.exd4 Bf5 9.a4 a6 10.Nb3 e6 11.a5 Qc7 12.Bd3 Bd6 13.Bxf5 exf5 14.O-O O-O 15.Nc1 Bb4 16.c3 Bxa5 17.Nd3 Rac8 18.Nfe5 Bb6 19.Re1 Qd6 20.Qf3 g6 21.Qf4 Thus far, 6.dxc5 is the only move that has been tried in the position (91 games as of this post, but that is sure to go way up). One-third of the games end in draws. This anti-London grab-the-b-pawn (I won't say it is poisoned) is not so awful kryptonic for White as I expected given the c5/Qb6 reputation; it's playable for either color. Do note that 5.Nbd2 was played before castling or the pawn pyramid was complete. White deals with his queenside earlier these days, lagging a bit behind on the kingside.

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
Nothing in violation of United States law.
No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
No trolling.
The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.
Do not degrade Chessgames or any of it's staff/volunteers.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific game only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

This game is type: CLASSICAL. Please report incorrect or missing information by submitting a correction slip to help us improve the quality of our content.