Chess for All Ages

A couple of months ago, in Chessify Progress Report (January 2023), I ended the post saying,

I'll continue to evaluate the [Chessify] service and perhaps learn why it's worth a subscription. If I discover anything important that I've overlooked to date, I'll come back with another post.

A couple of weeks later, the Chessify people started handing out free trial memberships. After a few weeks of the trial, I decided that a subscription was indeed worth the money, if for no other reason than to understand better the technology behind the service.

In that same post, I noted that there was 'No chess960 support'. Unfortunately, my test using the traditional start position encountered a snag when I received no moves from my opponents for over a week. I decided to analyze chess960 positions.

The main problem with chess960 in a traditional chess environment stems from the castling rules. Since chess960 games tend to become extremely tactical after a few moves have been played, there is nevertheless some value in trying to confirm the tactics with a traditional, non-chess960 engine. In one game, my chess960 engine indicated that White would have a big advantage after a certain move. The Chessify engines didn't like the move at all. It turned out that the difference hinged on a later move where White castled giving check, which is generally a strong move.

I'll continue using Chessify to look at chess960 positions. In the meantime, here are a few resources to help explore the Chessify service.

How to Analyze with Cloud Chess Engines on Chessify (2:10) • '[Published on] Feb 12, 2023'

The description for the corresponding Youtube video page says,

Learn how to analyze your chess games with Stockfish and other chess engines on the Chessify Analysis Dashboard. Choose from the variety of engine options, select the speed at which you want to analyze, and get the best move suggestions from the strongest chess engines in the world.

Other videos are available at Chessify AI (youtube.com). Although they are intended to overcome the lack of online documentation, they don't go into enough detail to do that successfully.

More info is available through Discord | #website-support | Chessify (discord.com). The videos point to the service's Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram pages, but I haven't looked at them yet. Other resources that I should follow are Latest News About Chessify (chessify.me) and Blogs about Chess Engines, Puzzles, & More (ditto).

Last week, in Chess.com's Game Review Tools (February 2023), I developed the chart shown on the left (see that post for a larger version of the chart as well as the codes used to identify the different boxes). Because all names in computerdom eventually reduce to an acronym, let's use GRT to mean 'Game Review Tools'.

Since you're reading this post, you're probably interested in analyzing your games and you're undoubtedly aware that chess games are nearly always recorded in a format called 'Portable Game Notation' (PGN). It follows that the different boxes in the GRT chart offer downloads in PGN format.

Specifically, the boxes coded '02, 03a, 03b, 05a, 05b' all have a download, aka 'Share', option. Are the downloads all the same? No, they aren't, but the differences between them aren't enormous and the rest of this post is to discuss their similarities and the differences.

A Chess.com pop-up window like the one shown below appears when you click a 'Share' option. This particular example is from the GRT window coded '03b' in the previous post.

Along with the link for the URL of the game analysis, the pop-up offers functions for posting it to various social media platforms, plus functions for saving the current game in other formats like 'Image', etc. The lower portion of the pop-up, with the background in White, is specific to the PGN function.

The first PGN box, titled 'FEN' is a character string that describes the essential elements of the current position in text format. It is recognized by most chess software. This particular example is for the chess960 start position 'NRKQRBBN'. Its initial castling option are, of course, all available and are shown by the characters 'EBeb'.

Just below the 'FEN' string, to the right of the 'PGN' title, is a series of icons for tailoring the format of the PGN. They are:-

• Annotation
• Computer Analysis
  
  
• Highlights
• Comments, and
• PGN Timestamps.

The first two icons are selected by a circle, indicating that they are mutually exclusive. The last three icons, which apply to the 'Annotation' icon, are selected by a square, indicating that they can be combined. I haven't tried all of the icons, but they are related to info/data visible via various GRT windows.

The chart box coded '02' has only the icon for 'PGN Timestamps' (default = 'no'). An example of the PGN output -- only moves, without variations or notes-- was shown near the end of the most recent post on my chess960 blog Chess.com Pinpoints a Tactical Error (February 2023). The other PGN functions are added as the 'Review' (chart box '03a') and 'Analysis' ('03b') tabs are invoked from '02'.

The PGN produced by the two chart boxes coded '05a' and '05b' is similar to '03a' and '03b'. The biggest differences are in the many tags (e.g. '[Event "Let's Play! - Chess960"') that make up the PGN header section. There are smaller differences in the moves themselves, but these aren't worth mentioning for now. Maybe later, maybe not; there is already much to explore here...

At the risk of immediately losing some visitors to this post, I'm going to continue a recent post from my chess960 blog, The Fascinating World of Chess960 (January 2023). There I wrote,

[Chess.com] has a good reputation for vigorously enforcing its no-engine policy, even if it leads to controversial decisions. [...] I switched to Chess.com in May 2022, playing one or (maximum) two games of correspondence chess at a time. [...] So far I've played about a dozen games on Chess.com, never once tempted to use an engine. [...] That's the background for a series of posts that I plan to write for my games on Chess.com. There are several aspects to be covered, e.g. Game review tools.

So here we are. The Chess.com game review tools appear to be the same for both traditional chess and chess960. Good thing, too, because the navigation of the tools is so unintuitive that I wouldn't want to learn two different methods.

I spent some time finding my way around the tools and decided to document my understanding in the infographic shown below. I'm sure it will help me in further explorations and it might help others trying to do the same.

The starting point for a game review is the archive, The Best Chess Games of [Me, Myself, and I] (chess.com). In the following examples, 'Me, Myself, and I' means my bemweeks account on Chess.com.

[NB: This seems like the right place to interject a big nota bene. Everything I say in this post describes how I understand the tools *now*. The tools might change tomorrow, or the day after tomorrow, and it is nearly certain that a year from now they will be different. On top of that, I might have overlooked something obvious that renders my remarks wrong. If I make a mistake, I'll correct it here. If something changes later, I probably won't document it here.]

The window on the top left of the graphic ('01') shows the archive of my games. Selecting a game from the list opens a new window for that game ('02'). The game window has two large buttons for further analysis. The green button on the left opens a 'Review' tab on an 'Analysis' window ('03a') and the gray button next to it opens an 'Analysis' tab on the same window ('03b'). The two new tabs are part of the same display, allowing an easy switch between the two.

(Expand for more readable view)

The game I'm using for the example is the first chess960 correspondence game I lost on Chess.com last year. I used the game review tools for the first time in an attempt to discover where I had gone wrong. A discussion of that game's ins-and-outs is better left for my chess960 blog.

The 'Analysis' tab ('03b') has a link called Saved Analysis (chess.com). It leads to a 'Saved Analysis' window ('04') where individual games can be selected. Selecting a game opens a 'Review' tab on another 'Analysis' window ('05a'), that looks similar to ('03a'). It also offers an 'Analysis' tab ('05b'), which displays the notes I made as the game was being played -- recall that this was a correspondence game.

The '03' and the '05' windows have competely different URLs. I haven't used them enough to determine if they offer different functionality. That will be the subject of another post, along with a comparison of windows '02', '03a', and '05a'.

Most (all?) of the game windows offer the option of downloading the PGN for the game. Window '02' has two options, 'Share' and 'Download', which appear to be identical. The downloaded PGN has the game score only, without variations.

Window '03a' has only a 'Share' option. The downloaded PGN includes variations incorporating the same notes already mentioned in '05b'.

Window '03b' also has a 'Share' option only. Its behavior is somewhat peculiar. When '03b' is first opened, it displays the moves of the game under review. If it is opened a second time, after switching to '03a' for example, it displays the notes to the game as in '05b'. The PGN behaves similarly. When the tab is first opened, it offers only the game score; when opened a second time, it offers all of the notes.

Confusing? Sorry about that. The functionality described above was probably developed at different times, perhaps by different people, without paying much attention to the interface that already existed. Better too much than too little some people might say.

A month ago, in Chessify Setup (December 2022), I wrote,

I set up a Chessify account, received some free time on their service, and started a new game on the LSS server, where engine use is generally allowed. I'll report on my progress in a future post.

This post is that report. I had White in the first LSS game, and after starting a Caro Kann (1.e4 c6 2.d4 d5), decided to play a move that I have always wanted to try: 3.f3, known for some obscure reason as the 'Fantasy Variation'. After six moves, my opponent disappeared, apparently having quit LSS. I started a new game, chose the highest rated opponent I could find, and received White again. My opponent turned out to be a specialist in a little-played variant of the Ruy Lopez, and had played 15 games with it on LSS. This gave me the chance to use Chessify to analyze the moves of his previous games. We have reached move 10 and I expect to follow his previous games for another few moves.

The two LSS games have given me sufficient opportunity to make an initial evaluation of Chessify. Following is a screen capture showing the user interface (GUI) after 1.e4.

The tool fits well with my method of analyzing correspondence games. I normally use three PGN copies of each game. I use one copy for my notes (the foreground copy). For the traditional start position, the opening notes include references to theory. I use another copy for engine analysis (the background copy) and I use a third copy for the moves actually played in the game (the official copy). Chessify replaces the copy for engine analysis.

I tried to keep a copy of the PGN within Chessify to carry over from one analysis session to another. That would be important if I were playing two or more games at the same time. I quickly realized that I didn't understand how it worked and decided to use the 'Import FEN' feature instead. That means I set up the current position of interest at the beginning of a session by copying the FEN string from the software that manages the foreground copy (SCID), and analyze from that point. I'll come back to Chessify PGN functionality if and when I need it.

Over the past month I've noted a few issues. The first arose from the email that confirmed my signup. It said,

Click the button below to verify your email address and receive 200 coins for free to try Chessify's up to 1,000,000 KN/s speed servers.

I never received any coins. A message at the top of the GUI always says, 'Coins : 0'. I also clicked on a free trial offer and received the message:-

Your free trial is on! Until November 23, you will have free access to all our features.

This was on December 21, well after the trial supposedly ended, and I still have no idea what 'free access' involves. Another problem is with network latency. I sometimes clicked 'Analyze' or 'Stop' engine evaluation and waited up to a minute for a response. Not sure if there was a problem, I then clicked a second time and triggered some buggy behavior that required a GUI reset to eliminate. I have other examples of some bugginess, but for now I'll just attribute it to the learning curve. A few other items worth mentioning are:-

• No online help
• No copying engine analysis to clipboard
• No chess960 support

None of the issues I've mentioned are blocking problems. I can live with all of them because I really like the functionality provided by the service.

I also considered subscribing; the info is here: Chessify Subscription Plans and Coins. The difference between the 'Free' plan and the 'Amateur' plan is currently about 80 USD per year. As much as I would like to subscribe, I don't see much functional difference between the two plans.

I'll continue to evaluate the service and perhaps learn why it's worth a subscription. If I discover anything important that I've overlooked to date, I'll come back with another post.

https://cooltext.com/

In the previous post on the world's foremost engine vs. engine competitions, TCEC/CCC Interludes (December 2022), I could have incorporated an explanation of 'Why interludes?', but I doubt it would have been news to many chess engine fans. Following is a summary of that post.

TCEC: LCZero beat KomodoDragon +24-13=63 in the 'S23 Subfinal' for the S23 runnerup position. The site then organized another VVLTC event, the third time that VVLTC has followed a Sufi. The S23 VVLTC was followed by an SVVLTC, which was followed by 'Noomen Extra 2'; see the 'Interludes' post for an explanation of its 3+11 engine structure. • CCC: Stockfish beat Lc0 114.5-85.5 in the 'CCC19 Rapid Final'. The site then ran a series of exhibition events.

Are the interludes (aka bonuses, aka exhibitions) overtaking the seasons in importance? Let's take a snapshot of the current situation.

TCEC: Stockfish won the VVLTC, then drew the two-game SVVLTC with LCZero. KomodoDragon placed first in the top-3 section of 'Noomen Extra 2'; Ethereal placed first in the next-11 section where none of the engines won a single game against the top-3.

LCZero then won the second chess324 tournament, a half point ahead of Stockfish. The two engines drew their own mini-match and scored identically against the other six engines, except for the rofChade matches where Stockfish lost a game. See Chess324 Is a Thing (September 2022), for an earlier post on this anti-draw C960/DFRC setup variant.

The site is currently conducting '4k Testing'. What's a '4K' engine?

!4k • Engine maximum size is 4 kiB (4096 bytes), Time control: 30'+3'', Format: 6 DRRs, Book: !4kbook, Potential engines: !4ku !pygone !we4k !ice4 !sunfish

!4kbook • First DRR bookless (standard starting position), then DRRs with openings from both Noomen Extra for total of 6x DRR.

Assembler anyone? The '!4k' command also mentions, 'For draft rules see': TCEC 4k Rules (wiki.chessdom.org).

CCC: After the 'CCC19 Rapid Final', there were so many CCC exhibition events that it might be useful to list them. Lacking time for that now, I'll try to tackle the chore for the next off-week post.

The site is currently running the 'CCC19 Bullet' event. For the first time in longer than I can remember, the site has updated the event's 'Info' tab to explain its different stages. Even more amazing, the info appears to be accurate and well thought out.

The 'CCC19 Bullet Newcomers' and 'Qualifier #1' events have finished, and 'Qualifier #2' is underway. All three events counted ten engines, with the top-four qualifying into the next event. Marvin went from 'Newcomers' to 'Qualifier #2', but its quest for stardom will likely end there.

The post, 'Chess324 Is a Thing', is worth mentioning for another reason -- it was the last time I looked at CCC administrators. The reference page About Chess.com (chess.com; 'We'll have to monitor "About Chess.com" for any updates regarding CCC administration.') is now marked 'Updated: Dec 8, 2022', but Connor (Connor McMonigle) is still listed as 'CCC Tournament Director' and Andrew (Andrew Grant) is still an 'Analysis Developer'.

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

***

Later: Re this action...

CCC: After the 'CCC19 Rapid Final', there were so many CCC exhibition events that it might be useful to list them. Lacking time for that now, I'll try to tackle the chore for the next off-week post.

...I already have ideas for several off-week posts on the back burner, so I'll address the point here. Of 18 recent events, 10 were exhibitions.

Recent CCC Events

The regular season events bracketed in red correspond to the following posts:-

(A:) 2022-12-26: TCEC More Interludes; CCC19 Bullet Underway
(B:) 2022-12-12: TCEC/CCC Interludes
(C:) 2022-11-28: TCEC S23, CCC19 Rapid : Stockfish Wins Both

Reminder: In '(B:)' I asked, 'When was the last time Stockfish did not win a CCC Bullet, Blitz, or Rapid tournament?'

Last month's Yahoos post, Chess960 Mania (October 2022; see the footnote for an explanation of Yahoos), raised a number of questions of vital interest to the global chess community:-

The Niemann lawsuit; the NYT puzzles; AICF pest control; will Google's 'Full Coverage' become a mainstay of chess news? There's plenty to look forward to in next month's Yahoos post.

First let's look at the numbers. Of the 100 chess stories returned by Google, 75 were for the current month, 25 for previous months.

Of the 48 different sources for the 75 current month stories, there were six sources that accounted for two stories or more. They are shown in the chart on the left.

Chess.com once again acccounted for the most stories, more than the combined total of the other five sources on the chart. For the third time in four months, Chessbase.com was runner-up, although its name changed to echo its domain name.

Now let's look at the questions from last month's Yahoos post. I promise that the discussion will be brief.

The Niemann lawsuit: Nada. Nothing. Disappeared.

The NYT puzzles: Ditto.

AICF pest control: Ditto.

Google's 'Full Coverage': Ditto.

So much for that. I'm still digesting the stories that Google did highlight, but have to run now. I'll be back later.

[Yahoos (mainstream news stories about chess) are derived from Google News top-100 (or so) stories from the past month.]

***

Later: We saw Google's 'Full Coverage' in two recent Yahoos posts:-

• Cheating Mania (September 2022).
• 'Chess960 Mania' (October 2022), linked in the first paragraph of the original post above.

Cheating mania continued into November. Of the 75 chess stories flagged by Google, seven focused on aspects of cheating. My favorite was this one; it has a great lead and its storyline just keeps getting better:-

• 2022-11-03: A Cheating Scandal Has Rocked the Chess World. The 'Chess Detective' Is on the Case (time.com) • 'On an October morning in Buffalo, N.Y., Professor Kenneth Regan sat down in front of his home computer, fired up Zoom, and, after some cheery pleasantries, all but accused a European chess grandmaster of cheating.'

Of the two chess960 stories in November, my favorite was this one, although with a caveat:-

• 2022-11-01: A simple rule variation could move chess out of a stalemate (popsci.com) • 'Chess960 is meant to keep the game's creativity -- and curb computers' edge.'

The caveat? Chess960 doesn't at all diminish the engine's advantage. The machines will still crush the best players in the world. Instead, it curbs their use in preparing for a specific opening : if you don't know what the start position will be, you can't prepare for it. Despite that clarification, kudos to Popular Science for introducing chess960 to a wider public.

Of the other stories I could mention, the one that gives the most mileage is this one:-

• 2022-11-03: Everything You Need To Know About Chess Culture (chess.com; Nathaniel Green)

It's packed with recommendations for different categories:-

Film & Television, YouTube & Twitch, Books & Literature, [...]

While 'Everything You Need To Know' is maybe a stretch, 'A Great Number of Things You Need To Know', isn't. See anything missing? Add a comment. There are already some excellent suggestions.

Podcasts have become an important component in understanding The Sociology of Chess (November 2016). Earlier this year in the series we had Women in Chess Podcasts (April 2022) and here we have top players talking about top-level chess.

C-Squared Podcast #10 | Global Chess Championship, Fischer Random & more with Vidit & Ganguly (44:29) • 'Streamed live on Nov 11, 2022'

'C-Squared' stands for the surnames of the two hosts, GM Fabiano Caruana and Romanian GM Cristian Chirila. The video's description wasn't much longer than its title and said,

After a busy week of chess, commentary, and more, we reunite in St. Louis immediately after the Fall Chess Classic to discuss LIVE.

For more about that tournament, see 2022 Fall Chess Classic (uschesschamps.com). The page explains,

The 2022 Fall Chess Classic is the third installment of the Chess Classics featuring international chess professionals. The Fall Chess Classic is comprised of two, 10-player Round Robin tournaments. Over the course of 10 days, these competitors will battle for more than $36,000 in prize money and gain valuable experience in top-level events.

The two Indian GMs -- Surya Shekhar Ganguly (seated second from the left) and Santosh Gujrathi Vidit (third) -- played in the A-section, while host Chirila (fourth, operating the equipment) played in the B-section. The discussion starts with the Fall Classic, then moves to the FIDE World Rapid and Blitz 2022 (fide.com), travel requirements, and more. At about 10:00, discussion of the Chess.com Global Championship 2022 (chess.com) kicks in, then at 25:40 moves to the Fischer Random (Chess960) World Championship. I've recently posted about both events on my other blogs:-

• 2022-11-16: Chess.com Global Championship (WCCB)
• 2022-11-26: 2022 FWFRCC Finals - Live (C960) • FWFRCC = FIDE World Fischer Random Chess Championship

Even though I was more than a little familiar with both events, I learned much more from the podcast. I'll be watching for further episodes on the channel C-Squared Podcast (youtube.com).

The September 2022 Chess Life had a topical article, 'But Does It Actually Work?; Sadler and Doknjas on improving by studying with modern engines' by IM John Watson. The master book author and reviewer discussed two books:-

• Sadler, Matthew. The Silicon Road to Chess Improvement. New in Chess, 2022.
• Doknjas, Joshua. The AI Revolution in Chess. Everyman Chess, 2002. [sic; 2022?]

The article is available online at Watson Book Review: Sadler, Doknjas, and Modern Engines (uschess.org). Watson explains,

To grossly oversimplify, the older-style engines (like Stockfish Classical, with what he calls 'hand-crafted evaluations') have continuously improved and are generally superior in calculating outrageously deep and ingenious tactics. Nevertheless, the neural network engines like Leela Zero with self-learnt evaluations can play a more profound and effective strategic ('positional') game, which tends to outperform the calculating monsters.

What can be learned from these engines, especially the NNUE engines? Watson again:-

These books convince me that engine study can lead to improvement, but generally in fairly narrow and specific contexts. First, by finding exact orders, well-timed maneuvers, and successful plans in the opening, as is practiced by every leading player in the world. More generally, in discovering typical maneuvers in certain structures and better evaluation of contrasting strategies -- for example, certain pawn sacrifices or flank attacks.

What does that say for chess960? The opening is different for every game and the phrase 'typical maneuvers' is meaningless. Perhaps it's better to ignore the engines completely.

Last month's Yahoos post (see the footnote for an explanation of Yahoos) was Cheating Mania (September 2022). It followed a course not seen in previous Yahoos:-

Unlike all previous posts in the Yahoos series, this month requires two charts to present the base statistics, shown below. On the left are the counts derived from Google News, similar to the chart in last month's Olympiad, Business, and Political Yahoos (August 2022). On the right are counts from a special supplement, linked from the Google News results and called 'Full Coverage'. These stories were 100% about the cheating scandal.

For the current Yahoos post, once again we have two charts -- Left: Base statistics, Right: Full coverage. This month the 'Full Coverage' is about an event I've been following on my chess960 blog, seen last week in 2022 FWFRCC Qualifiers (October 2022; 'FIDE World Fischer Random Chess Championship'). The final stage of the event is currently taking place in Iceland.

I'll continue to cover the FWFRCC final on that blog, incorporating Google's 'Full Coverage' into the next post. For this current post let's focus on the left chart.

This month Google News returned 101 stories, of which 83 were from the current month and 18 were repeats from previous months. Of the 83 current month stories, five sources accounted for more than two stories, a total of 33 stories, as shown in the chart on the left. Once again, Chess.com was the largest single source of chess stories.

In last month's 'Cheating Mania', I observed, 'Of the [78] Google News stories, 17 were about cheating.' The cheating story continued bigtime in October. Of the 83 stories, 10 were about cheating, three of those from Chess.com.

The biggest cheating story was flagged by Google from an obscure source called the 'Lebanon Democrat', which declined to give me a copy. The page it gave me said,

451: Unavailable due to legal reasons • We recognize you are attempting to access this website from a country belonging to the European Economic Area (EEA) including the EU which enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and therefore access cannot be granted at this time.

It turned out the original story was from the Associated Press (AP), available from multiple news sources. Here's one:-

• 2022-10-21: Chess star Hans Niemann sues over cheating allegations (abcnews.go.com) • 'Chess grandmaster Hans Niemann alleges in a federal lawsuit that chess world champion Magnus Carlsen and others destroyed his career by accusing him of cheating.'

Back to this month's chart on the left, the 33 stories were a mixed bag. The two 'chess' stories from the 'Chicago Sun-Times' had nothing to do with chess. They were about football. One of the 'New York Times' (NYT) stories was also about football, although with significant chess content. I featured it last week in a post Really Big Stereotypes (October 2022; 'The original NYT story can be found at "Forget Madden..." [nytimes.com]').

The NYT has been a leading source of Yahoos since The New No.2 Yahoo (June 2022), always because of their chess puzzles. This is the first month since June that none of their puzzles appeared on Google News.

As for the other 50 sources with a single story, several of the stories made my short list -- partly for their quirkiness -- but none was particularly compelling on a revisit. The best of the bunch was about the All India Chess Federation (AICF):-

• 2022-10-27: Chess federation claims pests destroyed records (thebridge.in) • 'The [AICF] has claimed that records pertaining to a Right to Information (RTI) Act query by a player were destroyed by pests at its headquarters here, leading to a rebuke from the Central Information Commission.'

The Niemann lawsuit; the NYT puzzles; AICF pest control; will Google's 'Full Coverage' become a mainstay of chess news? There's plenty to look forward to in next month's Yahoos post.

[Yahoos (mainstream news stories about chess) are derived from Google News top-100 (or so) stories from the past month.]

The most recent post on my chess960 blog, TCEC DFRC1 (August 2022), mentioned a new idea in the specialized world of chess engines:-

'!chess324 • A subset of DFRC where the Kings and the Rooks are at the usual starting position. Since castling is standard, this allows all engines to play.' For more about that definition, see Chess324 (talkchess.com; lkaufman, aka Larry Kaufman of Komodo++ fame).

That Talkchess thread ran its course and eventually died out, then came roaring back with a follow-up post by the same lkaufman: Re: Chess324 (talkchess.com):-

Chess324 now being used in CCC tournament! Dragon currently in first place (8 player multiple round robin), but it's early. Plenty of decisive games already, as hoped, though none yet between engines in the top half.

One of the ensuing discussions concerned the relative performances of three setup strategies -- chess960 (FRC), DFRC, and chess324 -- for reducing draws. Another was a substandard performance by Leela:-

Current working theory -- the [Leela] bad performance so far would be because we submitted an untested branch which ended up having a pretty bad bug. Whether that's actually why Leela has performed so poorly remains to be seen, but it's the most probable explanation, considering the analysis I was running on the side during games with a known good version. The playing Leela was updated to a fixed version around game 154.

At this point a CCC insider ('AndrewGrant') pointed out,

The mid-event "update", was actually a mid-event "revert one commit", so I felt happy to do it. Not a super serious event, so no harm done really by having some buggyness.

Grant is a well known personality in chess engines. His page, Andrew Grant (chessprogramming.org), says,

An American computer science and mathematics major at the University of Maryland, Baltimore County. He is author of the UCI compliant open source chess engine Ethereal, first officially released in June 2016, and the distributed SPRT testing framework for chess engines, OpenBench.

Perhaps not so coincidentally, OpenBench was featured in an August CCC event called, 'OpenBench Interlude #1'. Can we conclude from this that Andrew Grant has taken over responsibility for the CCC, at least temporarily? The following image displays what Chess.com, the owner/sponsor of CCC, has to say about the current(?) CCC TD and his apparent(?) successor.

About Chess.com (chess.com; 'Updated: Aug 26, 2022')

The LinkedIn page for 'Connor' confirms the end date: 'CCC Tournament Director; Chess.com; Jul 2021 - Aug 2022'. Will this personnel change be confirmed by a Chess.com announcement? I don't recall this being done the last time, so my guess is that we'll have to monitor 'About Chess.com' for any updates regarding CCC administration. See CCC Changes the Guard (October 2021), for the previous transition. Thanks, Connor, for a job well done.

The wheel of time continues to turn on the world's two foremost, continuous engine vs. engine competitions. Two weeks ago the headline said, Stockfish Wins TCEC DFRC1, Leads CCC18 Rapid Final (August 2022). Here's a summary of that post:-

TCEC: In DFRC1 ('Double Fischer Random Chess: 960*960 possible starting positions'), Stockfish and LCZero finished tied for 1st/2nd places with 16.0/22, 1.5 points ahead of KomodoDragon, which was 2.0 points ahead of Stoofvlees. In the 50 game final match, Stockfish beat LCZero 29.5-20.5 (+18-9=23). After DFRC1, the site launched 'S23 - Chess Bonus', the first event of season 23, which seems to be VSOB-style. • CCC: Stockfish won the 'CCC18 Rapid' Semifinal stage, well ahead of LC0, which was a half point ahead of Dragon. For some reason, the site skipped the Challenger stage, which would have pitted the 2nd & 3rd engines in the Semifinal stage against each other. Stockfish is currently clobbering LC0 in the Final stage.

What's the current status of the two sites?

TCEC: For more about the first ever DFRC event, see TCEC DFRC1 (August 2022) on my chess960 blog. I didn't go deeper into DFRC start positions, but I did document the technical underpinnings of the event:-

To understand what the TCEC accomplished -- and it's without question a noteworthy accomplishment -- let's quote some TCEC !definitions.

That brings us to TCEC season 23 (S23). My post on the equivalent stage of the previous season (S22) was TCEC S22 L3 and CCC16 Blitz Final Both Underway (February 2022). In that post I looked at some of the most important S22 rules:-

The TCEC flagship event is a long, multistage affair. It's useful to have an overview of promotion and demotion rules for the six divisions of the TCEC leagues.

That structure changed for S23. There are now two fewer divisions. Following is an extract of the S23 rules:-

1. Season : The Top Chess Engine Championship (TCEC) Season is the premier championship for chess software.
2. Qualification League [QL] : The top 4 engines promote to League 2.
3. League 2 [L2] : The bottom 4 engines relegate and the top 4 promote to League 1.
4. League 1 : The bottom 4 engines relegate and the top 2 promote to Premier Division.
5. Premier Division : The top 2 engines promote to the Superfinal and the bottom 2 engines are relegated to League 1.
6. Infrafinal : Head to head contest between the 3rd and 4th place of the Premier Division.
7. Superfinal : Head to head contest between the winner and 2nd place of the Premier Division.

Since the previous 'Stockfish Wins DFRC1' report, QL has finished and L2 is just getting started. Between QL and L2, S22 had L4 and L3, but these have since been eliminated. What happened to the engines that relegated in S22 L4/L3/L2? It would take some effort to work it out and no one is complaining.

CCC: As expected, Stockfish beat Lc0 in the 300 game 'CCC18 Rapid Final'; the final score was plus-55 for the Fish. After a pause for 'OpenBench Interlude' -- see OpenBench (chessprogramming.org) for an explanation of the so-called 'testing framework' -- the site launched a 'CCC18 Rapid Challenger' 300-game match between Dragon and Lc0. With the event more than 75% finished, Dragon has a small lead. Why is this being played after the Final match? The site's !next command explains nothing:-

Small event of new coming engines(?), and then ...? Your suggestions welcome at !discord.

That makes too many question marks to be useful. If the site were following the sequence seen in CCC16 and CCC17, after the 'CCC18 Rapid' event we would see 'CCC18 Bullet' and 'CCC18 Blitz'. Perhaps the CCC has undergone some sort of administrative shake-up, but its Club and Discord resources are silent.

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

Last week's post, Bobby Fischer Day by Day (May 2022), spawned a similar post on my chess960 blog, Bobby Fischer in 1996 (also May 2022). That post also relied on an earlier chess960 post containing an image exploring Fischer's first steps to develop the chess evolution that bears his name.

It didn't happen overnight. Here is that image again.

From The Early Evolution of Fischerandom (February 2021)

The 16 links in that image plus another 15 links in 'Early Evolution' revealed a larger picture. Putting all of the dates together I concluded,

Fischer's early [chess960] activities were bunched into two time periods. The first period took place in 1992-1993, when Fischer developed the rules of his emerging invention. The second period took place in 1995-1996, when Fischer revealed his invention to the world.

Those posts effectively covered Fischer's first steps. Another post on my chess960 blog, covering a later, post-1996 period, Fischer and 'Wild Variant 22' (December 2013), was pure speculation:-

I started to wonder whether Fischer might possibly have played chess960 on the ICC.

'Wild Variant 22' has long been the most popular post on the chess960 blog. I can imagine why.

On my chess960 blog (see the sidebar for a link) I'm fond of using the phrase 'Fischer's greatest invention' to describe Chess960/FRC. I'm certain that 99.9% of competent chess players would have a different opinion. Here's one serious alternative.

Chess Patents (m-w.com)
'Patent no. 4884255: Digital Chess ('Fischer') Clock'

More info can be found on US4884255A - Digital chess clock - Google Patents (patents.google.com). For example:-

Abstract: A game timing apparatus and method for simultaneously timing events for two players is disclosed. The method involves presetting a pair of clocks for respective initial time periods, starting one of the clocks to time a first player's move, simultaneously stopping one clock and starting the other, and incrementing or decrementing each of the clocks by a time interval once for each move or a group of moves. [...]

For any skeptics who doubt that Fischer was capable of obtaining this patent, note the additional info against it:-

• 1988-08-05: Application filed by Fischer Robert J
• 1989-11-28: Application granted

I'd never encountered Google Patents before. What's new in chess inventions since I created the 'Chess Patents' page in 2007?

The previous report on the world's two foremost engine-vs-engine competitions was Stockfish Wins Both TCEC FRC4 and CCC16 Bullet Events (January 2022). Here's a summary of Stockfish's margins of victory:-

TCEC: In the FRC4 Final, Stockfish beat LCZero +13-9=28. The site is currently performing 'S22 - QL L4 L3 Testing'. • CCC: In the 'CCC16 Bullet Final', Stockfish beat Dragon +480-124=1016 out of 1620 games. The site is currently running its 'CCC16 Blitz Main' event with 12 engines.

The TCEC has launched its next season, eight months after the start of the previous season, reported at the time in TCEC S21 Starts; CCC 'Eco Mini-Matches' (May 2021). The CCC is approaching another final match.

TCEC: For more about FRC4, see a pair of posts on my Chess960 (FRC) blog:-

• 2022-01-22: TCEC C960 FRC4
• 2022-01-29: TCEC FRC4 Unbalanced Books

After extensive testing, the TCEC Season 22 Qualification League ('S22 QL') is underway with 14 engines. For more info, see TCEC Leagues Season 22 (wiki.chessdom.org).

CCC: Six engines qualified from the 'CCC16 Blitz Main' event into the semifinal event, which has just ended. Stockfish, Dragon, and Lc0 finished 1-2-3, well ahead of the other engines. If 'CCC16 Blitz' follows the pattern of the previous tournament, 'CCC16 Bullet', Stockfish and Dragon will meet in the Blitz Final, just as they did in the Bullet version.

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

Two weeks ago, in the previous post on the two foremost, ongoing, engine vs. engine competitions, TCEC FRC4 Semifinals, CCC16 Bullet Finals : Both Underway (January 2022), both tournaments were close to declaring a winner. Here's a summary of that post:-

TCEC: The FRC4 'Final League' is currently underway. Stockfish is leading at the halfway point, but the point spreads separating the top three engines are close. The top two engines qualify into the Final. • CCC: Stockfish and Dragon qualified from the 'CCC 16 Bullet Semifinals' into the Final. Stockfish holds a commanding lead and is close to clinching the event.

The outcome of those events is the subject of this week's post.

TCEC: Stockfish and LCZero tied for 1st/2nd in the FRC4 'Final League', a point ahead of KomodoDragon. Stockfish beat LCZero +13-9=28 in the Final. A note mentioned,

!bookfrc • Final League and the Final will use unbalanced books [...] On the edge between draw and white win.

For more info, see TCEC FRC 4, under 'FRC Book Generation'. On the same page, a note under 'Polls' mentions, 'During League A, 112 lost FRC games from the Season 6 FRC Special Event was found and added to the database.' I couldn't find the lost games, but I didn't look very long.

After FRC4, the site ran an event called 'S22 - DFRC Sanity Check'. What's DFRC?

!dfrc • Double Fischer random chess: The same as Fischer random chess, except the White and Black starting positions do not mirror each other. Double FRC has 921,600 (960*960) possible starting positions.
https://tcec-chess.com/misc/dfrc/frc_openings.pgn

I should have more to say about 'unbalanced books' and DFRC when I tackle FRC4 on my chess960 blog. The site is currently performing 'S22 - QL L4 L3 Testing', where 'L' stands for 'League'.

CCC: In the 'CCC 16 Bullet Final', Stockfish beat Dragon 988.0-632.0 out of 1620 games. I didn't have time to work out the WLD stats; maybe later. [Later: +480-124=1016; Stockfish won six games w/ Black; Dragon none.]

After the CCC16 Bullet tournament finished, the site ran a 'No Black Castling' bonus event. Like the TCEC DFRC event, this is theoretically interesting and deserves further discussion.

The site is currently running its 'CCC 16 Blitz Main' event with 12 engines, three of which appear to have earned their participation via a qualification event. The 'Info' tabs for both events say, 'top 2 promote to Main', but it's titled 'CCC 16 Rapid Qualification' (not 'Blitz'). Communication has never been the CCC's strong point.

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

The new year marks three years since I first started following the TCEC and the CCC regularly. To find that initial report, see last week's post TCEC/CCC 2021-H2 Summary (December 2021), and follow the summaries back to '2019 Q1-Q3 Summary'.

The previous fortnightly post in the long running series was KomodoDragon Wins TCEC Swiss 2; CCC16 Bullet Semifinals Underway (December 2021). Following is a summary:-

TCEC: KomodoDragon won 'Swiss 2', a point ahead of Stockfish and LCZero. The site is currently conducting 'FRC4 Testing'. • CCC: In the 'CCC16 Bullet Qualification' event, Berserk and two other engines were promoted into the 12-engine 'Main' event. Berserk was also one of six engines to qualify into the semifinals. Stockfish, Dragon, and Lc0 are well ahead of the other engines for the two-engine final event.

TCEC: FRC4 (chess960) started with 23 engines in four 'Leagues' (A, B, C, D). The top two engines in each League promoted to two 'Semileagues', The top two engines in each Semileague, promoted to a 'Final League', which is currently underway. Stockfish is leading at the halfway point, but the point spreads separating the top three engines are close. The top two engines will qualify into the Final.

When it finishes, I'll cover the event in more detail on my chess960 blog. See the right navigation bar for a link.

CCC: Stockfish and Dragon qualified from the 'CCC 16 Bullet Semifinals' into the Finals. The score in their semifinal mini-match was +30-6=72 in favor of Stockfish, who holds a commanding lead in the final and is close to clinching the event.

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

This is the last post of the year covering the world's two foremost, ongoing engine vs. engine competitions. Following the usual format of posts in this series, here's a summary of the previous post, TCEC Swiss 2 in Final Round; Stockfish Wins CCC16 Rapid (December 2021):-

TCEC: The 'Swiss 2' event is now in the last of 11 rounds. KomodoDragon is a half point ahead of Stockfish and LCZero. The tournament will finish in a couple of days, to be followed by 'FRC4', a chess960 event. • CCC: The site is currently running the 'CCC 16 Bullet' tournament, which is in the 'Qualification' stage.

Following is the current situation.

TCEC: KomodoDragon won 'Swiss 2', a point ahead of the two engines mentioned in the summary. The runners-up in 2nd/3rd places finished 1.5 points ahead of the next group, which placed 4th through 7th.

The site is currently conducting 'FRC4 Testing', preparation for the next event, which has been running for over a week. For more about FRC4 (chess960), see TCEC FRC 4 (wiki.chessdom.org). The number of engines has increased by 50%, but the extended testing period suggests that not all engines are fully compliant with C960/FRC rules. For posts in this series about the previous FRC event, see:-

• 2021-03-15: TCEC FRC3, CCC Rapid 2021 : Both Finals Underway • 'FRC3 has reached the final match, where Stockfish and KomodoDragon are tied with one win each after 29 of the 50 games have been played.'
• 2021-03-29: TCEC 'Swiss 1', CCC 'Streamer Bots Battle' Both Underway • 'For a report on TCEC FRC3, see the post TCEC C960 FRC3 (March 2021), on my chess960 blog. There I wrote, "In the 'FRC 3' final, KomodoDragon beat Stockfish by a score of +2-1=47."'

CCC: In the 'CCC 16 Bullet Qualification' event, Berserk and two other (tied) engines were promoted into the 12-engine 'Main' event. Berserk was also one of six engines to qualify into the semifinals. Stockfish, Dragon, and Lc0 -- in that order -- are well ahead of the other engines for the two-engine final event.

The emerging star of both brief reports on the TCEC / CCC is KomodoDragon / Dragon. For more about this return from obscurity by the faded star Komodo, see last week's post Komodo Dragon (December 2021).

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

Not too long ago, the top-three elite chess engines were Stockfish, Komodo, and Houdini. Then Leela, incorporating AlphaZero's AI technology, joined the select group. Komodo fell behind and Houdini retired. Stockfish added an important AI component and Komodo added a similar component, becoming Dragon. Now the top three elite engines are Stockfish, Leela, and Dragon.

After I learned that Talkchess Is Talking Again (November 2021), I set out to discover what I had missed during the months after the forum went dark, plus the months before that when I hadn't been following it regularly. I was particularly taken by a series of announcements from GM Larry Kaufman, each of which generated many comments:-

• 2021-05-04: Komodo Dragon 2 released (talkchess.com)
• 2021-06-11: Komodo Dragon vs IM Andras Toth knight odds match (ditto)
• 2021-09-24: Komodo Dragon 2.5 released (ditto)

I had noticed in recent posts on this blog that Komodo Dragon had been regularly finishing among the leaders in both the TCEC and the CCC. Following are several of those posts.

2021-10-25: TCEC Cup 9, CCC C960 Blitz Final : Both Underway • 'The [TCEC] 'Cup 9' has reached the semifinal round, with Stockfish, ScorpioNN, KomodoDragon, and LCZero all qualifying for that stage.' • 'In the [CCC] 'Chess960 Blitz Semifinals', Stockfish finished a point ahead of Dragon as both engines qualified for the final match. Only one game of their 40-game minimatch was decisive, with Stockfish winning.'

2021-11-08: TCEC Swiss 2, CCC16 Rapid : Both Underway • 'In the [TCEC 'Cup 9'] semifinal round, Stockfish beat ScorpioNN +1-0=21, and LCZero beat KomodoDragon +1-0=27. In the final round, Stockfish beat LCZero +1-0=3. In the consolation match ('Bronze') for 3rd/4th place, KomodoDragon beat ScorpioNN +2-0=2.' • 'In the [CCC 'Chess960 Blitz Championship'] final match Stockfish beat Dragon +10-1=589.'

2021-12-06: TCEC Swiss 2 in Final Round; Stockfish Wins CCC16 Rapid • 'The [TCEC] 'Swiss 2' event is now in the last of 11 rounds. KomodoDragon is a half point ahead of Stockfish and LCZero, which are a full point ahead of the next engine.' • 'Stockfish won the final match of the 'CCC 16 Rapid', beating Lc0 by a score of +80-32=188. In a 'Runners-up' match, Lc0 beat Dragon by a score of +60-41=199. Dragon had finished third in the 'Rapid Semifinals', well ahead of three other engines.'

Getting back to the Talkchess threads, this is how GM Kaufman introduced 'Komodo Dragon 2.5 released':-

KomodoChess has just released Dragon 2.5 at KomodoChess.com. Normally we would call this 2.1, but it is probably the largest upgrade we have had between versions in many years, with the exception of the NNUE idea first implemented in Dragon 1. It could easily be Dragon 3, but it's only been four months since Dragon 2 and we can't use that name this soon contractually.

It has a larger, "smarter", better trained net, and noticeably more search depth due to search enhancements. Estimated elo gains in standard mode over Dragon 2 range from 50 at long time controls on four threads to 60 at CCRL blitz (2' + 1") on four threads to 72 at CCRL blitz on one thread. In MCTS mode gains are even larger by about ten elo.

All this is based on direct matches of 3400 games or more with a normal opening book. Gains are even larger with unbalanced books, and especially large in Fischerandom (chess960), where on one thread at blitz Dragon 2.5 beat Dragon 2 by a full hundred elo in a 3400 game match! It also defeated Stockfish 14 in a 650 game bullet (half minute plus half second inc) FRC match by 11 elo (132 wins, 112 losses, 406 draws).

The main new feature is a major improvement to the Skill levels. There are now 35, up from 25, and they now consider node count, depth, and eval randomizing in a much more logical, gradual way than in prior versions. The levels should much better simulate the play of a human at that level playing a game with enough time to think thruout the game. The intent is that each level should be a fair match at Rapid (15' + 10") chess with a human of the same FIDE rating as the Skill level set with two zeroes added.

The rest of the post discussed issues related to calculating ratings for the various 'Skill levels'. The feature is related to an earlier post on this blog: Komodo Personalities (April 2021).

It's a positive development for all concerned to have another engine challenging the dominance of Stockfish and Leela. I'm especially interested to see how Dragon performs in the forthcoming TCEC FRC4 (chess960) event. To close this post, I'll repeat the standard footnote to my fortnighly posts on the TCEC/CCC series...

[For further information from the various stakeholders in the engine-to-engine events, see the tab 'TCEC/CCC Links' at the top of this page. • NB: Leela = LC0 = LCzero; Dragon = KomodoDragon]

A few weeks ago, in a post titled TCEC Swiss 2, CCC16 Rapid : Both Underway (November 2021), I wrote,

I certainly wouldn't want to see forced openings used in chess960. It's high time for the chess engine community to investigate a more creative solution to the problem of excessive draws in engine play.

In the traditional start position RNBQKBNR (also known in chess960 as SP518), White has 20 possible first moves. For each of those 20 moves, Black has 20 possible responses. That makes exactly 400 possible positions after one move by each side. Why not run a match in which every game starts with one of those 400 positions, a different position for each game? Since some positions obviously favor one side -- 1.a4 b5 favors White, while 1.a4 e5 favors Black -- the start positions should be played twice, colors switched. That way, no engine has an advantage because of a single dubious position.

Positions well known to current theory, like 1.e4 c5, should be played without any forced book. If 800 games are too many for a match, select the start positions randomly. A 100 game match would need 50 different start positions.

'Oh, no!', purists will say, 'Hundreds of years of experience with 1.d4 and 1.e4 along with millions of recorded games shouldn't be discarded so easily!' That's what people might say. I can't imagine that engines will raise the slightest objection. Since that idea isn't going to fly anytime soon, if ever, let's look at how the openings were chosen for the latest TCEC season.

• 2021-05-08: Jeroen Noomen and GM Matthew Sadler announce TCEC S21 superfinal book cooperation (chessdom.com) • 'One of the key elements of TCEC is the opening book. Playing at a 3000+ ELO strength, backed by serious hardware, often leads to series of draws in direct battles. Providing imbalanced opening lines is essential to differentiating engine playing strength. Or the way the tournament organizers specify it, “We believe that a champion chess program ought to be able to perform well in a wide variety of opening systems, not merely those that it favors.” The opening book becomes increasingly important as the TCEC championship progresses and is essential in the Superfinal, where the stakes are highest. As of today, the TCEC S21 Superfinal opening book has a serious team upgrade: Jeroen Noomen and GM Matthew Saddler [sic] are teaming up!'

Along with GM Larry Kaufman, GM Sadler is one of the strongest human players participating actively in the world of chess engines. His entry in the Chessprogramming wiki, Matthew Sadler (chessprogramming.org), starts,

English chess grandmaster, chess writer and two-time British Chess Champion, in 1995 and 1997. In 2017, he analyzed the computer games of AlphaZero versus Stockfish, and along with Natasha Regan co-authored the book Game Changer which details the lessons that can be learnt from how AlphaZero plays chess. Since TCEC Season 14 in 2019, Matthew Sadler reports on the Superfinals of the Top Chess Engines Competition, published on TCEC and the ICGA Journal.

I finished coverage of season 14 in Stockfish Wins TCEC S14; CCC6 S2 Underway (February 2019). A companion blog post to the Chessdom article listed the criteria for selecting TCEC S21 openings.

• 2021-05-08: The TCEC 21 superfinal book, by GM Matthew Sadler and Jeroen Noomen (blogchess2016.blogspot.com) • 'I am excited to announce that the TCEC 21 superfinal book has been made in cooperation between chess Grandmaster Matthew Sadler and myself (JN).'

It relates well to a post I recently did on my chess960 blog: The Engine Iceberg Looms Larger (November 2021). I was particularly interested to learn that 'Statistics of the previous two superfinals [TCEC S19 & S20] show that a Leela book exit below +0.30 is an almost 100% certain draw.'

Don't misunderstand me. I'm not questioning the quality of the TCEC S21 preparation. If engines are forced to play like us, this appears to be an excellent approach. I'm questioning why engines are forced to play like us.

Back to the idea for 400 positions, perhaps chosen randomly, the same idea can be extended to chess960. All 960 positions start with 16 possible Pawns moves, 2-4 Knight moves (depending on whether one or both Knights start in the corner), and maximum one castling move (positions patterned '**RK****' or '*****KR*'). That makes between 18 and 21 initial moves per start position, with that quantity squared after one move by both sides.

It's been almost 25 years since IBM's Deep Blue beat Garry Kasparov, then reigning World Champion, in a chess match. Now the engines are rated hundreds of points higher than the best humans. Why do we continue to force the engines to start games the way we do when we are playing at our level? It shouldn't be the only test of chess skill.