OpenChess

All the data is useful, and I'm very grateful for the final test. I can only congratulate Dorsz on this derivative engine, and I have no choice but to take an X-ray to Kokaburra; the work is extraordinary.

And thank you very much, Mr. Sedat, for taking the time and resources to do it.

Best regards and have a great weekend!

Thanks a lot.

Mr. Anton,

As usual, you are welcome )

Meanwhile,
You may notice or not e.g as good news is that
The win. per.s stats by UHO+Lichess 4852 are
56%-44%, where via Unique openings: 52%-48%

Just I'd like to point out that too,
52% - 48% stats are counted as most usual stats,
Which belonging to the strongest opening theory!

Btw, exactly same win perc. stats are produced in
Most SCCT Book Tours, and one of them with same
52%-48% are produced in latest organized XLIII CS:
https://sites.google.com/site/computers ... nnue-cs-43

One thing more, sometimes I wonder too,
If I run a new DUEL but with Time Control Odds:
Strong openings 30s+0.5s Vs Weak openings 2m+1s

Let's say Top books 30s+0.5s Vs Depth4 2025 2m+1s
Any idea who will win ?) I assume Depth4 since it
Will use much slower time control: Blitz 2m+1s

Moreover, according to our Troll on chess forums,
Deeds (botunnet) loves to say that fast Bullet Time
Controls are meaningless, plus full with blunders..but
To know about this mystery..(instead of Bla-Bla-Bla..)
A real 'proof' data is required, right ?)

Wishing you a wonderful weekend too )

Greetings

Hello, Sedat

I hope you are going and still thanks for your contest you have been running over the years.

In this reply, I will clarify the role and benefits of UHO (Unbalanced Human Openings) and address several points raised by yu for additional context.

1. Understanding UHO (Unbalanced Human Openings)

The UHO concept is simple: select openings that are fully legal, chess‑theory based, yet inherently unbalanced, giving White a tangible (sometimes extreme) advantage. These lines:

• Are entirely “human” in origin—no custom modifications like preventing castling or inventing unnatural configurations.

• Can potentially create more decisive outcomes (fewer draws) in engine testing, because White begins with a clear lead or dynamic potential.

• Serve as a way to highlight performance differences among engines quickly.

• One important misunderstanding is to equate “UHO” with “blundered lines.” In reality, “unbalanced” does not mean “inaccurate.” It simply means that from the very first moves, one side attempts a riskier setup. Such lines are still legitimate opening theory.

Your main arguments

• “Weak openings lead to more decisive results, but those are ‘blunders’ and do not reflect engines’ strength.”

While it is true that extreme blunders or outright mistakes serve little purpose in engine testing (because the outcome becomes trivial), UHO openings are not the same as “inserting deliberate blunders.” They are riskier or unusual but remain valid within standard theory. In engine competitions, these aggressive setups can demonstrate how well an engine handles imbalances—often more revealing than playing symmetrical or overly “perfect” opening lines.

• “Strong openings reduce blunders and thus produce more draws, giving us better data.“

Fewer decisive results do not always guarantee “better” or more reliable data. Indeed, obtaining a 92% draw ratio can flatten out meaningful rating fluctuations, forcing testers to require tens of thousands of games before seeing differences. On the contrary, obtaining a balanced number of decisive games (especially from unbalanced openings) can make rating gaps more statistically significant with fewer games, which is precisely a key reason behind adopting UHO sets.

• “Faster time controls plus strongest openings is always better.”

While bullet or blitz time controls can be entertaining and produce high volumes of games quickly, there is an ongoing debate in computer chess circles about whether such rapid conditions reveal the true strength of an engine. Many would suggest that slower time controls allow deeper calculation, revealing how engines handle complex middlegame or endgame scenarios. The choice between bullet and slower classical time controls depends heavily on the testing goal:

• If the goal is rapid throughput, bullet helps.

• If the aim is maximum depth of search, slower is preferable.

One last point.

• A Subtle Point About “Blunders in the Opening”

Sedat’s statements suggest that any line that is not “theoretically strong” amounts to a blunder. However:

• Chess theory is vast, and many offbeat lines (like UHO) are still far from outright blunders.

• Some lines are simply riskier and lead to sharper positions; that does not necessarily make them “bad testing lines.”

• Ultimately, a test suite that includes both “strong” and “unbalanced” lines can prevent engines from only memorizing “main lines” and drawish continuations.

Clarifying Anton101

• Multiple Opening Suites – The data references Unique, UHO, and UHO+Lichess 4852. These sets vary in average draw ratio and in the typical advantage for White.

• Bayeselo Program Measurements – Anton is basically saying that the derivative engine (e.g., “Dorsz…Kokaburra…”) performed impressively compared to others. The “final test” to which he refers is presumably the set of matches run on these various opening suites.

• Anton acknowledges the value of having multiple testing sets (including unbalanced ones) to cross-verify engine strength.

• He also points out that no single set of data is a perfect reflection of engine skill—rather, they collectively help us draw better conclusions.

Key Reasons Why UHO is Useful

• Greater Imbalance = Faster Distinction: Highly unbalanced openings help engines diverge in their evaluations more quickly, revealing their deeper planning capabilities.

• Less Risk of Artificially Inflated Draws: Purely “strong” or symmetrical openings can artificially inflate draw rates, requiring enormous sample sizes to differentiate closely matched engines.

• Real-World Human Testing: Human players rarely stick solely to the “absolute main lines,” so featuring practical or unusual lines can simulate more varied, real-world chess scenarios.

Summary

While Sedat’s emphasis on “strong openings” and bullet tests caters to a particular style of rating measurement, there are strong counterarguments in favor of unbalanced lines such as UHO:

• They do not represent forced blunders but calculated imbalances that expose engines’ abilities to handle sharp positions.

• They help generate more decisive outcomes without sinking into draws, which can make rating differences clearer in fewer games.

• They reflect a broader range of “real” positions humans might explore, rather than restricting engine tests to narrow, theoretically “perfect” lines.

• Recommended best practices typically involve mixing different test suites—some featuring main lines, others featuring UHO or critical unbalanced positions—to fully measure an engine’s capability across the entire spectrum of chess. This approach avoids overfitting, ensures that we see both how an engine handles best play as well as how it navigates unusual or risky structures.

• While I prefer personally balance and less biased opening test sets, UHO has demonstrated the value for chess programmers for improving their test engine

Regards.

supernova wrote: Sat May 03, 2025 3:35 pm Sorry, I corrected a couple of errors from the original message. This Forum does not let you remove your messages.

Hello, Sedat

I hope you are going and still thanks for your contests you have been running over the years.

In this reply, I will clarify the role and benefits of UHO (Unbalanced Human Openings) and address several points raised by you for additional context.

Understanding UHO (Unbalanced Human Openings)

The UHO concept is simple: select openings that are fully legal, chess‑theory based, yet inherently unbalanced, giving White a tangible (sometimes extreme) advantage. These lines:

• Are entirely “human” in origin—no custom modifications like preventing castling or inventing unnatural configurations.

• Can potentially create more decisive outcomes (fewer draws) in engine testing, because White begins with a clear lead or dynamic potential.

• Serve as a way to highlight performance differences among engines quickly.

• One important misunderstanding is to equate “UHO” with “blundered lines.” In reality, “unbalanced” does not mean “inaccurate.” It simply means that from the very first moves, one side attempts a riskier setup. Such lines are still legitimate opening theory.

Your main arguments

• “Weak openings lead to more decisive results, but those are ‘blunders’ and do not reflect engines’ strength.”

While it is true that extreme blunders or outright mistakes serve little purpose in engine testing (because the outcome becomes trivial), UHO openings are not the same as “inserting deliberate blunders.” They are riskier or unusual but remain valid within standard theory. In engine competitions, these aggressive setups can demonstrate how well an engine handles imbalances—often more revealing than playing symmetrical or overly “perfect” opening lines.

• “Strong openings reduce blunders and thus produce more draws, giving us better data.“

Fewer decisive results do not always guarantee “better” or more reliable data. Indeed, obtaining a 92% draw ratio can flatten out meaningful rating fluctuations, forcing testers to require tens of thousands of games before seeing differences. On the contrary, obtaining a balanced number of decisive games (especially from unbalanced openings) can make rating gaps more statistically significant with fewer games, which is precisely a key reason behind adopting UHO sets.

• “Faster time controls plus strongest openings is always better.”

While bullet or blitz time controls can be entertaining and produce high volumes of games quickly, there is an ongoing debate in computer chess circles about whether such rapid conditions reveal the true strength of an engine. Many would suggest that slower time controls allow deeper calculation, revealing how engines handle complex middlegame or endgame scenarios. The choice between bullet and slower classical time controls depends heavily on the testing goal:

• If the goal is rapid throughput, bullet helps.

• If the aim is maximum depth of search, slower is preferable.

One last point.

• A Subtle Point About “Blunders in the Opening”

Sedat’s statements suggest that any line that is not “theoretically strong” amounts to a blunder. However:

• Chess theory is vast, and many offbeat lines (like UHO) are still far from outright blunders.

• Some lines are simply riskier and lead to sharper positions; that does not necessarily make them “bad testing lines.”

• Ultimately, a test suite that includes both “strong” and “unbalanced” lines can prevent engines from only memorizing “main lines” and drawish continuations.

Clarifying Anton101

• Multiple Opening Suites – The data references Unique, UHO, and UHO+Lichess 4852. These sets vary in average draw ratio and in the typical advantage for White.

• Bayeselo Program Measurements – Anton is basically saying that the derivative engine (e.g., “Dorsz…Kokaburra…”) performed impressively compared to others. The “final test” to which he refers is presumably the set of matches run on these various opening suites.

• Anton acknowledges the value of having multiple testing sets (including unbalanced ones) to cross-verify engine strength.

• He also points out that no single set of data is a perfect reflection of engine skill—rather, they collectively help us draw better conclusions.

Key Reasons Why UHO is Useful

• Greater Imbalance = Faster Distinction: Highly unbalanced openings help engines diverge in their evaluations more quickly, revealing their deeper planning capabilities.

• Less Risk of Artificially Inflated Draws: Purely “strong” or symmetrical openings can artificially inflate draw rates, requiring enormous sample sizes to differentiate closely matched engines.

• Real-World Human Testing: Human players rarely stick solely to the “absolute main lines,” so featuring practical or unusual lines can simulate more varied, real-world chess scenarios.

Summary

While Sedat’s emphasis on “strong openings” and bullet tests caters to a particular style of rating measurement, there are strong counterarguments in favor of unbalanced lines such as UHO:

• They do not represent forced blunders but calculated imbalances that expose engines’ abilities to handle sharp positions.

• They help generate more decisive outcomes without sinking into draws, which can make rating differences clearer in fewer games.

• They reflect a broader range of “real” positions humans might explore, rather than restricting engine tests to narrow, theoretically “perfect” lines.

• Recommended best practices typically involve mixing different test suites—some featuring main lines, others featuring UHO or critical unbalanced positions—to fully measure an engine’s capability across the entire spectrum of chess. This approach avoids overfitting, ensures that we see both how an engine handles best play as well as how it navigates unusual or risky structures.

• While I prefer personally balance and less biased opening test sets, UHO has demonstrated the value for chess programmers for improving their test engine

Regards.

Hello Supernova,

Many thanks for your useful, great comments!

And well-done! and it seems that
You're quiet professional in this area!


Best,
Sedat

UPDATE - Unofficial Duel

As usual, I'm pleased to announce that
One of most exciting Duels is started:
Depth4 2m+1s Vs Top Books 30s+0.5s

Some Notes:
Weak player via Blitz 2min+1sec: Depth4 2025 Vs
Strong players but via fast Bullet 30sec+0.5sec:
Cevdet Dual
Esculapio
OPTIMUS 2502

Conditions/More Details:
2x Epyc 7B12, CuteChess, Ponder OFF, 1 Core, 64 Hash, 4 MEN
As usually, all the participants will be played by Raubfish SC
I've picked the Top 3 public books of latest XLIII Championship:
https://sites.google.com/site/computers ... nnue-cs-43
About Depth4 2025, it's exactly same player, which available to public
Moreover, from above screenshot is clear about Odd time controls etc.

Note also that the Duel will contain:
100 games individually, but in total: 300 games

And any guess? who will win under these cond.?
And to be more clear, 2m+1s is HUGE advantage..

Good luck and have fun )

Breaking News (03.05.2025):
This time 'No Comments' exception:
Who said that SCCT's 'fast Bullet games' are as bad quality ?!)

GAMES:
https://mega.nz/file/K0IwwLzZ#KC9oSnWIf ... HE55NW1Ih0

Note also that,
The games by players are shared individually (not merged)!

Greetings

Hi Sedat
I am very happy to see you active again. Personally I missed your tests and tournaments. You know better than me ,we have a mature child in this forum that you shouldn't value his posts and comments so much. I am sure that now everybody know him well.
Best regards

Homayoun wrote: Sat May 03, 2025 9:10 pm Hi Sedat
I am very happy to see you active again. Personally I missed your tests and tournaments. You know better than me ,we have a mature child in this forum that you shouldn't value his posts and comments so much. I am sure that now everybody know him well.
Best regards

Hello Homayoun,

Thanks a lot... and it's nice to see you here!
Yes, time to time I run some tests...however,
Nowadays I have no much free time for chess...

On other hand,
I have some doubts that he is a child,
Due a real child is naturally honest !)

Moreover,
When I watch a child, usually I get strength, courage etc.
But when I read his posts..too far to be so, rather it seems
He is unhappy, dishonest, a hopeless guy, no more no less!
And may God help him...

Greetings

BREAKING NEWS (05.05.2025)
Just another series of Unofficial tours, but this time via
UHO 2022 +170 +179, reason of running it? more better!
And finely Kookaburra couldn't be Number One! but I think
Due to current openings are too critical, blunder, weak!
And what is 'blunder' word? In short: a careless mistake
And if I am wrong here..please correct Me...but if possible
Instead of papers..with facts! because here stats say the
Last words and based on my experience, no way such win.
Perc. (94%-6%) to be produced by well-tuned, strong lines!
And once more, usually
It is a mystery to see the real strength if via these lines!
Btw, same UHO 2022 opening suite is used to play in LVI CS:
https://sites.google.com/site/computers ... t-nn-cs-56
Anyhow no any regret and all latest tours are mainly for fun,
That's why please don't take too seriously the played results!

The Winner: SF-X 130425 - Congratulations to Vasid Chouhan!

GAMES:
https://mega.nz/file/X05VGJTA#icmCiMbnz ... FzlG2D4ATo

Best,
Sedat