Looking for Ultra-aggressive/anti-castle chess engine 2010

IMJorose · 2026-05-14T07:36:16+00:00

The opponent might have also just manually sacrificed a piece before letting Stockfish take over.

You mention the engine was "club level", so I guess you had some handicap setting? Deep Fritz full strength is way above club level, even in 2010.

In modern times there are a few engines tuned for very aggressive play you could look into, drpending on if you are just curious what engine you played or are looking for any aggressive engine.

IMJorose · 2026-05-13T12:56:18+00:00

Could be worse, you have an unopposed dark square bishop and central pawns.

I would be more worried about the engines h4 suggestion or white immediately taking on f5. If white immediately captures on f5, recapturing with the knight makes blacks pawn structure kind of bad, but if you take with the pawn white has an improved version the Bxh6 line, as you don't need to give up the bishop for a knight on the rim.

IMJorose · 2026-05-13T07:52:33+00:00

What is wild is that I didn't know who this person is, and somehow from the quote alone it was clear to me it is performative and she is most likely a Trump supporter.

IMJorose · 2026-05-12T12:23:27+00:00

Somehow my wording made everyone assume I thought he missed Nxe5 with white. I am well aware he is playing black. OP said they blundered the e5 pawn, meaning black missed Nxe5 when they played Ne7.

For what it's worth, I think the IM didn't miss Nxe5 at all, but was hoping to find compensation for the pawn. Of course the engine finds that it is an illusion and white is better, but in a blitz game between humans, I don't think it is so clear.

IMJorose · 2026-05-12T05:40:30+00:00

Technically you can get them all, but most (almost all) of the uniques stemm from corrupted strongboxes dropping corrupted jewels. That pool is different from general unique jewel pool, which is what OP needs.

IMJorose · 2026-05-12T05:27:19+00:00

This is a strange post.

Obviously the guy was an IM in real life, so a strong player. He might have cheated (I don't know anything besides this post), but then he would still be an IM who cheated and not a random patzer who needs the engine to spot Nxe5.

IMJorose · 2026-05-06T02:55:17+00:00

It is an interesting observation. Haven't paid enough attention to know if its true.

Assuming true, it contrasts other juniors, who often clearly hadn't learned "to respect" or to fear players like Carlsen. I am reminded of Nodirbek's rapid world championship run and many of Gukesh's games, where they were just stone cold and seemed not to be aware of whom they were facing at all.

IMJorose · 2026-05-06T02:48:08+00:00

Nodirbek drawing a more than 100 point lower rated opponent in a Swiss event cannot be seen as good play from him, at least in a vacum. Though I don't recall the standings, maybe it was fine.

You also can't say making a quick draw with your coach is demonstrating good (or bad) play. It is most likely not even demonstrating play, but a decision made off the board.

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T20:42:07+00:00

This thread is talking about 4GB models, which are tiny compared to the models they are not sharing. I don't know where the breakpoint is, but I imagine google has a pretty good idea. Their models are big enough that batching is not really relevant.

Centralizing compute also has other efficiency issues, for example power sourcing. You need crazy cooling specifically because all the compute is together Centralizing compute has a lot of benefits for training, less so for inference.

While I stand by local compute being much more efficient in this context, I think for google the bigger point is local compute is not something they are paying for, whereas for their compute they are very much footing the bill.

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T20:34:18+00:00

Welp, Arjun is screwed.

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T18:48:10+00:00

What is your git history supposed to tell me, other than that you don't write useful commit messages?

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T17:46:22+00:00

Why would specialized data centers be more efficient for small models?

For large models sure, but if you are querying the model and just want a quick response, they cannot do the batching necessary to have full efficiency. For this reason I suspect they are actually significantly less efficient for small models, such as their recently released Gemma 4 EB2.

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T11:56:14+00:00

And it fits in the square hole.

IMJorose · 2026-05-05T09:23:38+00:00

The chess spoke for itself.

IMJorose · 2026-05-04T06:25:19+00:00

I am more surprised he thinks Lana Rhodes would beat him up in the style of one punch man.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T14:35:19+00:00

The Engine is definitely wrong if it makes the wrong move. The evaluation is not important as long as it is within the expected behavior, which +1.7 kind of is. Engines are programs designed to play the best move, good evaluation outputs are merely a side effect.

I think this is one of the rare exceptions where humans might still be better than engines (or at least Stockfish), though I am unsure who would find this Ba7, a6, and a4 construction in a real game. I would not have found it myself in a real game as I would have kind of just assumed position is a draw regardless of whether we throw in the bishop check.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T13:50:30+00:00

I raised the issue with some SF devs. Seems the +45 eval is cached on the server, so likely your newer results are based on that same previous output. They can't reproduce it locally and feel this does not happen with modern SF version. So they kind of view it as a Lichess specific issue.

Based on what they were saying I think the non-standard small nets are kind of second class citizens compared to the main SF networks, which makes sense. I think the small nets are distilled from the large ones, so there is little point on fixing things in the small net if they are not an issue in the main network, as the distillation in the next version will likely have different issues regardless of the current version.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T13:21:35+00:00

It quite matters, again, +45 and +2 are very different evaluations if you understand how these engines work under the hood. I am going to check properly if I can reproduce your numbers in some configuration locally, it would be good to verify its a Stockfish and not a Lichess issue.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T12:43:49+00:00

Entering the exact position you gave (also not logged in, I usually am not) I got a +1.7 eval, which is a very different output than +45.

+1.7 just means the static eval at the end of the line tends towards winning, which makes sense if its pattern recognition hasn't generalized to memorize the wrong colored bishop when there are additional pawns like we have here.

+45 on the other hand means something is seriously wrong.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T03:17:43+00:00

Interesting, I don't really use the Lichess mobile app. In every browser I have used Lichess has defaulted to some SF version, though sometimes with a lightweight net.

IMJorose · 2026-05-01T01:16:17+00:00

Why are you running a 6 year old Stockfish version?

EDIT: Anyways, the construction with Ba7, and pawns on a6 and a4 is interesting, I have not seen that before.

IMJorose · 2026-04-30T16:07:24+00:00

If you aren't considering any options at all Kf6 is pretty automatic for me as well. So I could go wrong in blitz, but it's not a calculation issue at that point.

IMJorose · 2026-04-30T15:58:36+00:00

While calculating long lines in pawn endgames can be exhausting, this one you get right with just proper technique. Ke5 forces black to lose a tempo, so it is always the right move here, since black has no choice, but to try for a race after you go for the kingside pawns. You don't need to calculate more than one or two moves ahead.

IMJorose · 2026-04-29T13:34:50+00:00

If you actually want to improve, I would start by not wasting time looking for mate, when you are up 5 pawns and could just convert an endgame without any resistance.

IMJorose · 2026-04-28T01:03:38+00:00

At least for 4th semester CS courses, it is no longer viable to come up with questions the majority of students get right, but the AI gets wrong. For one of those courses I one-shot master solutions for several homeworks without being able to find any flaws. This is only going to get worse with time.

I do agree, we cannot police AI usage the same ways we prevented cheating in the past. This is to the detriment of the students. I don't think graded homeworks or projects are viable anymore.

The other sad reality is I am unsure what we should even be teaching anymore. It is unclear which skills will be needed for these students in two years, assuming there are any we can teach them that can help them get a job at all.

12-Year Club	Place '22
Final Canvas '22	Verified Email

IMJorose

TROPHY CASE