thanks for the info on the time controls
Quote:
I'm currently looking at the rather interesting opening between Ke Jie and Ilya Shikshin...
... poor Ilya
M3 too far
| Life In 19x19 http://lifein19x19.com/ |
|
| IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 http://lifein19x19.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=15306 |
Page 2 of 2 |
| Author: | Elom [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 2:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
After the second round of the men's team event, Taiwan had the highest game score after shutting out Japan, and Korea and China had the same score down to SOS. If parings are decided by scores whenever possible, the fact that China happened to play Taiwan in round 3 meant it would have been difficult to win even if China beat Taiwan due to SOS meaning China still ends up playing Europe in the last round (this is speculation, however, as I am unsure as to the precise nature of the pairing system). On another note for the women's side, if China won the last match against Japan, it would have come first. If China lost, it would have come third. I'm currently looking at the rather interesting opening between Ke Jie and Ilya Shikshin... |
|
| Author: | Gomoto [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 4:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
thanks for the info on the time controls Quote: I'm currently looking at the rather interesting opening between Ke Jie and Ilya Shikshin... ... poor Ilya M3 too far |
|
| Author: | Elom [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Gomoto wrote: thanks for the info on the time controls Quote: I'm currently looking at the rather interesting opening between Ke Jie and Ilya Shikshin... ... poor Ilya M3 too far I could only speculate that he was inviting black to fight as I have no way of knowing. After what seemed to be an exchange of sorts on the lower side, white played into black's corner on the lower right! At one point I think one half of the board was full, with the other nearly empty. |
|
| Author: | Elom [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 8:36 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Results courtesy of the Chinese Weiqi Association IMSA website (http://cwa.imsa.cn)   
|
|
| Author: | bugcat [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 12:18 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Pardon my ignorance, but has a Western-born Western-federation-aligned professional ever played against the World #1 before? And for that matter, was this game with Ilya actually played whilst Ke Jie was #1? |
|
| Author: | hyperpape [ Thu Dec 14, 2017 1:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
bugcat wrote: Pardon my ignorance, but has a Western-born Western-federation-aligned professional ever played against the World #1 before? And for that matter, was this game with Ilya actually played whilst Ke Jie was #1? There are some other games featuring Ke Jie, including one other against Ilya: https://www.goratings.org/en/players/1090.html
|
|
| Author: | Elom [ Fri Dec 15, 2017 1:17 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Final results! (http://cwa.imsa.cn)    http://cwa.imsa.cn/archives/60185 http://cwa.imsa.cn/archives/60185 |
|
| Author: | kimidori [ Fri Dec 15, 2017 2:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
So Ke Jie beat Park twice in this event. However he took White in both games, and it seems like W always win in games between these two. |
|
| Author: | WindCaliber [ Sun Dec 17, 2017 1:06 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Interestingly, the AlphaGo tool has the first 24 moves of the 1st game between Park and Ke in its database. Aside from the first couple of moves up to move 6, the moves by Park that Master seems to disagree with most are  ,  , and  (?). Meanwhile, every one of Ke Jie's moves was Master's optimal move. Maybe Ke Jie has finally become AlphaGo!Master thinks B should play a keima to the low approach on the bottom right at instead of the double kakari. It judges the keima on the bottom right 1.8% points higher than the game move. The next move that Master disagrees with is ; it thinks that Park should have made a 2-space extension instead of kosumi. I found this interesting because it seems straight forward that Master wants to reduce the effectiveness of the pressing move that AG loves in the following diagram.Interestingly, Leela also agrees with Master about . W's stones seem to be working well after the exchange.Finally, Master suggests at 'b', with the game move being at 'a'(AG has no variations for this move). After  , Park's "winning percentage" stood at 39.2%, down from 44.9% at  . |
|
| Author: | Uberdude [ Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
That game to move 20 is the same as the team go from the Wuzhen event. Park's kosumi is the move AG recommends, the attach the humans played at Wuzehn is -5% to 36% and then extend of move 26 minus a whopping 9.8% to 26%, it really was game over quickly! They did comment after how they changed their plan and the cut became a bad exchange if they were going to extend afterwards -- a case of too many cooks spoil the broth. |
|
| Author: | Elom [ Sun Dec 17, 2017 6:38 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
WindCaliber wrote: Interestingly, the AlphaGo tool has the first 24 moves of the 1st game between Park and Ke in its database. Aside from the first couple of moves up to move 6, the moves by Park that Master seems to disagree with most are , , and (?). Meanwhile, every one of Ke Jie's moves was Master's optimal move. Maybe Ke Jie has finally become AlphaGo!AlphaGo Master to be more precise! If Ke Jie 9p played an assistive role in the development of this tool, it may not be surprising. I couldn't help but be intrigued by the winning percentage difference from move 6; Master seems very sure, it reminds me of when someone said that Cho Chikun 9p evaluated that a game as within half a point in the early middle game. In addition, AlphaGo Master is, I believe, two iterations behind the latest version-- so I wonder, would be difficult for professionals to take its evaluations as definitively as it could be! For example, regarding maybe someone could tell as to whether it is a case of Master preferring territory compared to AlphaGo Zero, which I think Michael Redmond 9p may have mentioned if I remember correctly.PS: (WindCaliber) Having not posted in a while was a little intrigued by some similarities (Meant in the best way  )
|
|
| Author: | WindCaliber [ Sun Dec 17, 2017 10:35 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: IMSA Elite Mind Games 2017 |
Uberdude wrote: That game to move 20 is the same as the team go from the Wuzhen event. Funny you say that because I was thinking to myself, "Hmm, this game seems familiar.." Then, I tried browsing through all the AlphaGo games to find which one it was, but finally got too lazy to finish searching.  Elom wrote: I couldn't help but be intrigued by the winning percentage difference from move 6; Master seems very sure, it reminds me of when someone said that Cho Chikun 9p evaluated that a game as within half a point in the early middle game. In addition, AlphaGo Master is, I believe, two iterations behind the latest version-- so I wonder, would be difficult for professionals to take its evaluations as definitively as it could be! I think 4858 ELO is a good reason to believe its evaluations It's still a bit of an open ended question as to whether AG Ke and AG Master are different. DeepMind said that they could be considered the same, but previously I think they said that they were going to further train Master before the Wuzhen event. My guess was that they had the same code architecture, but the only difference was extra training, which maybe didn't improve it too much due to plateauing. |
|
| Page 2 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|