← Back to context

Comment by debatem1

9 hours ago

Also, you learn to be a better chess player by... playing better players. The widespread availability of chess engines has made flawless opponents available to every player.

If your goals are understanding the game, self improvement, building thinking skills-- this is the best chess has ever been. It's only if your goal is to beat every opponent you can find that chess is in a bad place.

It's not that easy. Playing stockfish is like playing tennis against the wall (for untitled players at least).

Even if you don't blunder anything, you'll still find yourself in a worse position without any clue as of what went wrong and why.

Whereas when playing humans, they can usually explain their approach and when they noticed errors in your play.

  • I mean, I'm not a great player but I've learned a lot from working through games with stockfish using a git repo and a small script that lets me rewind to different moves and try different approaches. It may not explain its moves but if you're thinking through what's happened you can usually debug your game anyway.

  • > Playing stockfish is like playing tennis against the wall (for untitled players at least).

    It's the same for Magnus Carlsen. Even with Queen odds, Stockfish is literally unbeatable for the best players in the world. It's just too strong at evaluating all kinds of random tangent moves (and ensuing positional advantage) which no human player can possibly pay attention due to the time required.

    Stockfish vs any human is like Carlsen vs other players by about 3-5 orders of magnitude[0]. It's that stark.

    [0] A wild pun appears.

    EDIT: To avoid having to respond to each responder, fair comments about Queen odds. Maybe I was thinking Rook odds? Also, I kinda lumped Stockfish in with all the other engines, but I realize there are other engines with different properties ofc.

    • Well, that's actually not true at all. Stockfish is not a very good odds player and at queen odds is easily beatable even by bad players like me. It will just trade down into more trivial and easier to win positions that it perceives as "less bad", since everything is super-losing anyway when you start down a queen.

      Leela odds networks, on the other hand, are an entirely different beast. I cannot beat Leela queen odds, much less rook or minor piece odds, and even GMs struggle against Leela knight odds.

      Without odds though, yeah, Stockfish is just incomprehensibly strong by human standards. All top chess engines are, but Stockfish moreso.

    • No worries, I know stockfish is unbeatable by humans.

      But sometimes, these GMs can flag it, which counts as a win (especially when it's proxied by a cheater). Sometimes they can also explain the idea that cost them the game, so they've learned something maybe.

      Whereas us scrubs literally cannot do anything at all for reasons completely beyond our understanding.

      1 reply →