| |
Main
Date: 05 Oct 2005 19:48:18
From: Folkert van Heusden
Subject: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
I did some datamining on 100.000 (+/-) chess games (by grandmasters and
rookies) and found that white seems to win 1.26 more often then black (note
that the analysis is not finished yet, my script is still analysing more
games). Are there any ideas on why this is true? Is it true at all? (I
mean: my analysis can be wrong, of course)
Folkert van Heusden
www.vanheusden.com
|
|
| |
Date: 12 Oct 2005 06:11:33
From: anthony mee
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"Folkert van Heusden" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I did some datamining on 100.000 (+/-) chess games (by grandmasters and
> rookies) and found that white seems to win 1.26 more often then black
> (note
> that the analysis is not finished yet, my script is still analysing more
> games). Are there any ideas on why this is true? Is it true at all? (I
> mean: my analysis can be wrong, of course)
>
>
> Folkert van Heusden
> www.vanheusden.com
>
I'm afraid my results for the last 20 years would spoil your findings - my
Black results are far better than with White!
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2005 14:58:46
From: LSD
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's opening
preparation is likely better for the White side then the black.
I think once both sides are out of opening book, the players are going on
skill alone (ie the tactical and positional factors they observe).
"Folkert van Heusden" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I did some datamining on 100.000 (+/-) chess games (by grandmasters and
> rookies) and found that white seems to win 1.26 more often then black
> (note
> that the analysis is not finished yet, my script is still analysing more
> games). Are there any ideas on why this is true? Is it true at all? (I
> mean: my analysis can be wrong, of course)
>
>
> Folkert van Heusden
> www.vanheusden.com
>
|
| | |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 23:37:48
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Chess is a forced win for Black because White is in Zugzwang. This was
proven long ago.
> Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's
> opening preparation is likely better for the White side then the black.
>
> I think once both sides are out of opening book, the players are going on
> skill alone (ie the tactical and positional factors they observe).
>
>
> "Folkert van Heusden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>I did some datamining on 100.000 (+/-) chess games (by grandmasters and
>> rookies) and found that white seems to win 1.26 more often then black
>> (note
>> that the analysis is not finished yet, my script is still analysing more
>> games). Are there any ideas on why this is true? Is it true at all? (I
>> mean: my analysis can be wrong, of course)
>>
>>
>> Folkert van Heusden
>> www.vanheusden.com
>>
>
>
|
| | | |
Date: 08 Oct 2005 10:36:19
From: Few Good Chessmen
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Chess is a forced win for Black because White is in Zugzwang. This was
> proven long ago.
Excuse my ignorant but how was it proven? Any references on your assertion
(I'll take the refutations also) would be great...I know Zugzwangs could
appear in Endgame Studies but from Opening Phase is uncertain to me.
-----------------------------------------
"oh...please please throw me a bone dear old great one"
>
> > Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's
> > opening preparation is likely better for the White side then the black.
> >
> > I think once both sides are out of opening book, the players are going
on
> > skill alone (ie the tactical and positional factors they observe).
> >
> >
> > "Folkert van Heusden" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>I did some datamining on 100.000 (+/-) chess games (by grandmasters and
> >> rookies) and found that white seems to win 1.26 more often then black
> >> (note
> >> that the analysis is not finished yet, my script is still analysing
more
> >> games). Are there any ideas on why this is true? Is it true at all? (I
> >> mean: my analysis can be wrong, of course)
> >>
> >>
> >> Folkert van Heusden
> >> www.vanheusden.com
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
|
| | | | |
Date: 08 Oct 2005 05:22:17
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
>> Chess is a forced win for Black because White is in Zugzwang. This was
>> proven long ago.
>
> Excuse my ignorant but how was it proven?
Um, it was a joke.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 08 Oct 2005 19:12:06
From: Few Good Chessmen
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >> Chess is a forced win for Black because White is in Zugzwang. This was
> >> proven long ago.
> >
> > Excuse my ignorant but how was it proven?
>
> Um, it was a joke.
I'm not even sure if you aware the implications of your sick joke (Chess
Heresy). Please don't make such profanity again (from either sides) in the
future unless proven...almost had a heart-attack!!!
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 09 Oct 2005 09:24:55
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
>> >> Chess is a forced win for Black because White is in Zugzwang. This
>> >> was
>> >> proven long ago.
>> >
>> > Excuse my ignorant but how was it proven?
>>
>> Um, it was a joke.
>
> I'm not even sure if you aware the implications of your sick joke (Chess
> Heresy). Please don't make such profanity again (from either sides) in the
> future unless proven...almost had a heart-attack!!!
The joke has a purpose and is therefore not heresy. The idea is to never
take even the most "basic wisdom" for granted and to consider other
possibilities.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 08:36:36
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Ray Gordon <[email protected] > wrote:
> The joke has a purpose and is therefore not heresy.
Huh? All heresy has a purpose.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Impossible Perforated Robot (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a high-tech robot but it's
full of holes and it can't exist!
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 09 Oct 2005 19:25:24
From: Ron
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
In article <[email protected] >,
"Ray Gordon" <[email protected] > wrote:
> > I'm not even sure if you aware the implications of your sick joke (Chess
> > Heresy). Please don't make such profanity again (from either sides) in the
> > future unless proven...almost had a heart-attack!!!
>
> The joke has a purpose and is therefore not heresy. The idea is to never
> take even the most "basic wisdom" for granted and to consider other
> possibilities.
Sometimes it helps if a "joke" is "funny."
When a joke is merely a recitation of some faulty piece of chess
knowledge, recited by someone who panders other faulty bits of chess
knowledge as truth ...
Well, you can finish that sentence yourself, if you like.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 09:23:12
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
LSD <[email protected] > wrote:
> Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's
> opening preparation is likely better for the White side then the black.
Surely it's the other way round? Imagine two players, Mr White and Mr
Black who only ever play with one colour. Mr White essentially has a
choice of three opening moves. If he plays 1.e4, he needs something
prepared against each of e5, e6, c5 and c6 and needs at least a few ideas
about how to handle d6, Nf6 and g6; if he plays 1.d4 with 2.c4, he needs
to know what to do against all forms of the queen's gambit (accepted,
declined, Slav), the king's Indian, the Gruenfeld, the Benoni and the
Nimzoindian or queen's Indian. Admittedly, he could play 1.c4 or 1.d4
with 2.Nf3, which tend to give less flexibility to Black as long as the
transposition to the 1.d4 2.c4 openings is avoided.
Mr Black, on the other hand, just needs one response to each of white's
reasonable opening moves. If he plays the Sicilian, he doesn't need to
know anything at all about the other 1.e4 openings, for example. For
bonus ks, he can play the Pirc, Modern or Alekhine defences, at which
he's almost guaranteed to be better-prepared than his opponent at almost
any level. (On the down side, these openings are relatively difficult to
play the black side of at most levels.)
Now, this is slightly artificial because, in the real world, Mr Black has
to play games with white, too, and his preparation for the black side of
the Sicilian will help him if he plays 1.e4 in those games. Also, if Mr
Black wants to play the black side of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6, he has to have
something prepared against both 3.Bb5 and 3.Bc4 and ought to have some
ideas about what he'll do in the case of 3.d4 and 2.f4.
But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
preparation because he has much more choice about his first move than
white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these possibilities.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Sadistic Miniature Atlas (TM): it's
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ like a map of the world but you can
hold in it your hand and it wants to
hurt you!
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 13:42:48
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:Oyu*[email protected]...
> LSD <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given
player's
> > opening preparation is likely better for the White side then the
black.
>
> Surely it's the other way round? Imagine two players, Mr White and
Mr
> Black who only ever play with one colour. Mr White essentially has
a
> choice of three opening moves. If he plays 1.e4, he needs something
> prepared against each of e5, e6, c5 and c6 and needs at least a few
ideas
> about how to handle d6, Nf6 and g6; if he plays 1.d4 with 2.c4, he
needs
> to know what to do against all forms of the queen's gambit
(accepted,
> declined, Slav), the king's Indian, the Gruenfeld, the Benoni and
the
> Nimzoindian or queen's Indian. Admittedly, he could play 1.c4 or
1.d4
> with 2.Nf3, which tend to give less flexibility to Black as long as
the
> transposition to the 1.d4 2.c4 openings is avoided.
>
> Mr Black, on the other hand, just needs one response to each of
white's
> reasonable opening moves. If he plays the Sicilian, he doesn't need
to
> know anything at all about the other 1.e4 openings, for example.
For
> bonus ks, he can play the Pirc, Modern or Alekhine defences, at
which
> he's almost guaranteed to be better-prepared than his opponent at
almost
> any level. (On the down side, these openings are relatively
difficult to
> play the black side of at most levels.)
>
> Now, this is slightly artificial because, in the real world, Mr
Black has
> to play games with white, too, and his preparation for the black
side of
> the Sicilian will help him if he plays 1.e4 in those games. Also,
if Mr
> Black wants to play the black side of 1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6, he has to
have
> something prepared against both 3.Bb5 and 3.Bc4 and ought to have
some
> ideas about what he'll do in the case of 3.d4 and 2.f4.
>
> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move
than
> white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
possibilities.
>
I think you're wrong. In your example, White has
to prepare for 1 position (the starting position),
Black for 3. Even if the positions were objectively
equal, (i.e. White has no advantage in the starting
position or after e4 d4 or c4) Black still has a much
bigger task. Sure White has more work at move 2
than Black has at move 1, but that's not a fair
comparison.
|
| | | | |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 12:11:22
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
David Kane <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
>> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move
>> than white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
>> possibilities.
>
> I think you're wrong. In your example, White has to prepare for 1
> position (the starting position), Black for 3.
I think you're counting wrongly. :-) The initial position doesn't require
any preparation: we can caricature it by saying that c4, d4 and e4 are all
`good moves' and everything else is a `bad move'. Black, then, has to
prepare for three positions but White has to prepare for each of the
positions (typically more than three) that can arise from Black's first
move.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Pickled Hungry Game (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a family board game but it'll eat you
and it's preserved in vinegar!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 18:52:31
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:k7j*[email protected]...
> David Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
> > David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
> >> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move
> >> than white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
> >> possibilities.
> >
> > I think you're wrong. In your example, White has to prepare for 1
> > position (the starting position), Black for 3.
>
> I think you're counting wrongly. :-) The initial position doesn't
require
> any preparation: we can caricature it by saying that c4, d4 and e4
are all
> `good moves' and everything else is a `bad move'. Black, then, has
to
> prepare for three positions but White has to prepare for each of the
> positions (typically more than three) that can arise from Black's
first
> move.
>
>
Consider that Black and White have the same size opening books.
White will be "in-book" longer than Black. Example. Assume
that "book" contains just one move. White is in-book on move 1,
Black is out-of-book.
For Black to be in-book on move 1, he'll need (in your example)
to have 6 moves in his book. Yet 6 moves is enough for White to
be in-book at move *2* for two different Black responses.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 08:34:05
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
David Kane <[email protected] > wrote:
> Consider that Black and White have the same size opening books.
> White will be "in-book" longer than Black.
Not necessarily. Trivial counterexample: suppose White's book contains
only 1.e4 e5 and Black's contains only 1.e4 c5. The books are the same
size but Black is in book for two ply and White for only one. Indeed,
White's book can contain arbitrarily many lines starting 1.e4 e5 and Black
will still be in book longer!
> For Black to be in-book on move 1, he'll need (in your example)
> to have 6 moves in his book. Yet 6 moves is enough for White to
> be in-book at move *2* for two different Black responses.
You should count positions, not moves. Black doesn't need to know what to
do in the initial position because it's not his move, so he needs only
three entries in his book to `survive' his first move.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Expensive Cheese Bulb (TM): it's like
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ a light bulb that's made of cheese
but it'll break the bank!
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 18:19:56
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:b+A*[email protected]...
>
> You should count positions, not moves. Black doesn't need to know
what to
> do in the initial position because it's not his move, so he needs
only
> three entries in his book to `survive' his first move.
Ok. Here's my count. I've looked at
how many responses there are which
are played at least 2% of the time:
By this criterion, there are 4 W moves
in the starting position. The number of
Black responses ( >2%) is given.
e4 8
d4 6
Nf3 7
c4 7
Therefore, depending on what he plays,
White has to learn 6-8 positions to
be in book at move 2.
Looking 1-ply deeper:
e4 c5 4
e4 e5 4
e4 e6 3
e4 c6 5
e4 d6 3
e4 g6 3
e4 Nf6 3
e4 d5 3
d4 Nf6 4
d4 d5 3
d4 e6 4
d4 f5 6
d4 g6 4
d4 d6 4
Nf3 Nf6 4
Nf3 d5 4
Nf3 c5 5
Nf3 g6 4
Nf3 f5 6
Nf3 d6 4
Nf3 e6 5
c4 Nf6 4
c4 e5 2
c4 e6 5
c4 c5 3
c4 g6 5
c4 c6 5
c4 f5 4
Therefore, depending on what
he plays, Black has to prepare
for 12-22 positions to be in-book
at move 2.
Of course, the number of positions is
exaggerated due to transpositions, and
things might change slightly using
a criteria different than 2%, and
certainly one could carry an analysis
to a deeper ply, but it seems clear that
opening preparation is easier for
White than Black. (6-8) vs. (12-22).
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2005 01:35:50
From: Ray Gordon
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
> Of course, the number of positions is
> exaggerated due to transpositions, and
> things might change slightly using
> a criteria different than 2%, and
> certainly one could carry an analysis
> to a deeper ply, but it seems clear that
> opening preparation is easier for
> White than Black. (6-8) vs. (12-22).
That would be correct, as White's first move sets the tone for the game more
than any other move.
Black is easier to play, however, since his choices are much more restricted
due to the slight disadvantage of not having the first move.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 02:10:26
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:b+A*[email protected]...
> David Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Consider that Black and White have the same size opening books.
> > White will be "in-book" longer than Black.
>
> Not necessarily. Trivial counterexample: suppose White's book
contains
> only 1.e4 e5 and Black's contains only 1.e4 c5. The books are the
same
> size but Black is in book for two ply and White for only one.
Indeed,
> White's book can contain arbitrarily many lines starting 1.e4 e5 and
Black
> will still be in book longer!
First, 1. e4 e5 is not a white book.
The White book would be just 1. e4.
Second, Black needs to have a response
for each position he might face. 1. e4 c5 is
only one third of his book (in your example
where White has only 3 good moves).
>
> > For Black to be in-book on move 1, he'll need (in your example)
> > to have 6 moves in his book. Yet 6 moves is enough for White to
> > be in-book at move *2* for two different Black responses.
>
> You should count positions, not moves. Black doesn't need to know
what to
> do in the initial position because it's not his move, so he needs
only
> three entries in his book to `survive' his first move.
>
Actually, *you* should count positions.
(Moves and positions scale so that is not
a significant difference) It is trivial that if
Black and White have equal numbers of
playable moves at each move, White will
be in book longer. So your argument hinges
on the belief that Black somehow has more
branches than White.
E.g. to be in-book at move 2, simplistically
white will need to deal with 1*B1
positions. Black will have to deal with
W1*W2 positions. Arguing that B1 >W1
doesn't make your case.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2005 15:25:54
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
David Kane <[email protected] > wrote:
>"David Richerby" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> David Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Consider that Black and White have the same size opening books.
>>> White will be "in-book" longer than Black.
>>
>> Not necessarily. Trivial counterexample: suppose White's book
>> contains only 1.e4 e5 and Black's contains only 1.e4 c5. The books are
>> the same size but Black is in book for two ply and White for only one.
>> Indeed, White's book can contain arbitrarily many lines starting 1.e4
>> e5 and Black will still be in book longer!
>
> First, 1. e4 e5 is not a white book. The White book would be just 1. e4.
Er, OK, then. If you want to play it that way, put White's book to be
1.e4 and, if 1... e5 then 2.Nf3.
> Second, Black needs to have a response for each position he might
> face. 1. e4 c5 is only one third of his book (in your example where
> White has only 3 good moves).
Why? Sooner or later, the player's going to have to start to calculate.
Why insist that he must be able to play from memory for n moves regardless
of what the opponent plays? Why is it invalid to say ``If White plays
1.e4, I'll use my encyclopaedic knowledge of the Sicilian to beat him and,
if he plays anything else, I'll just have to make something up over the
board'' ? Or, more likely, ``The closed Sicilian isn't all that
challenging for Black so I'll just play on general principles and make
things up if White tries that against me.''
Dave.
--
David Richerby Perforated Lotion (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ soothing hand lotion but it's full
of holes!
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 11 Oct 2005 10:19:58
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:+mx*[email protected]...
>
> Why? Sooner or later, the player's going to have to start to
calculate.
> Why insist that he must be able to play from memory for n moves
regardless
> of what the opponent plays? Why is it invalid to say ``If White
plays
> 1.e4, I'll use my encyclopaedic knowledge of the Sicilian to beat
him and,
> if he plays anything else, I'll just have to make something up over
the
> board'' ?
Your assumption was that we were already
narrowing the discussion to good moves.
If you want to claim that the fact that a
player has the choice of being unprepared
against a strong move like 1. d4 is evidence
that Black has an easier opening task, then
I'm afraid that's a brand of logic that I'll not
contest.
> Or, more likely, ``The closed Sicilian isn't all that
> challenging for Black so I'll just play on general principles and
make
> things up if White tries that against me.''
>
The point is that, in general, if White and
Black have the same sized book, White
will be in-book longer than Black. The fact
that you can construct an idiotic White
book and create a counterexample doesn't
have a bearing on the general proposition.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2005 10:54:24
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
David Kane <[email protected] > wrote:
> Your assumption was that we were already narrowing the discussion to
> good moves. If you want to claim that the fact that a player has the
> choice of being unprepared against a strong move like 1. d4 is evidence
> that Black has an easier opening task, then I'm afraid that's a brand of
> logic that I'll not contest.
I think I'm making my case badly enough that even I'm not sure I believe
it any more. That being the case, I think I'll shut up now and just note
that I disagree with your argument but am coming round to the idea that
your conclusion may well be true.
> David Richerby wrote:
>> Or, more likely, ``The closed Sicilian isn't all that challenging for
>> Black so I'll just play on general principles and make things up if
>> White tries that against me.''
>
> The point is that, in general, if White and Black have the same sized
> book, White will be in-book longer than Black. The fact that you can
> construct an idiotic White book and create a counterexample doesn't have
> a bearing on the general proposition.
The books I suggested were only idiotic because I was trying to come up
with small examples. You're talking about the case where one player or
the other can guarantee that they will be in book longer, in which case
they need book replies to every legal move. I'm suggesting that there are
lines in which one side or the other can get a reasonable position by just
playing natural moves made up over the board, saving some book space for
more challenging lines elsewhere.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Chocolate Soap (TM): it's like a
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ personal hygiene product that's made
of chocolate!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 12 Oct 2005 12:23:05
From: David Kane
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:S1k*[email protected]...
> David Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
.''
> >
> > The point is that, in general, if White and Black have the same
sized
> > book, White will be in-book longer than Black. The fact that you
can
> > construct an idiotic White book and create a counterexample
doesn't have
> > a bearing on the general proposition.
>
> The books I suggested were only idiotic because I was trying to come
up
> with small examples. You're talking about the case where one player
or
> the other can guarantee that they will be in book longer, in which
case
> they need book replies to every legal move.
Not at all. I was preserving your assumption
that only good moves be considered. Otherwise
White would just have an easy 20:1 advantage.
I'm suggesting that there are
> lines in which one side or the other can get a reasonable position
by just
> playing natural moves made up over the board, saving some book space
for
> more challenging lines elsewhere.
>
Be that as it may, your argument still hinges upon
Black having sufficiently more branches than
White to offset White's advantage of moving
first. In another post I actually looked at that
up to ply 3 and found no evidence to support it.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 16:37:52
From: LSD
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
"David Richerby" <[email protected] > wrote in message
news:k7j*[email protected]...
> David Kane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
>>> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move
>>> than white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
>>> possibilities.
>>
>> I think you're wrong. In your example, White has to prepare for 1
>> position (the starting position), Black for 3.
>
> I think you're counting wrongly. :-) The initial position doesn't require
> any preparation: we can caricature it by saying that c4, d4 and e4 are all
> `good moves' and everything else is a `bad move'. Black, then, has to
> prepare for three positions but White has to prepare for each of the
> positions (typically more than three) that can arise from Black's first
> move.
I can't make sense of that. In terms of opening preparation, whatever White
faces on move two, Black faces *worse* on move two. And likewise for each
subsequent move. The only advantage was for White, and it was on move one.
Saying that move one "doesn't require any preparation" discounts the fact
that White's first move is the ONLY opening that White has to practise and
prepare. Black does not have that advantage on move one, and NEITHER colour
has that advantage in any subsequent move.
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 07:57:25
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
LSD <[email protected] > wrote:
> David Richerby <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I think you're counting wrongly. :-) The initial position doesn't
>> require any preparation: we can caricature it by saying that c4, d4 and
>> e4 are all `good moves' and everything else is a `bad move'. Black,
>> then, has to prepare for three positions but White has to prepare for
>> each of the positions (typically more than three) that can arise from
>> Black's first move.
>
> I can't make sense of that. In terms of opening preparation, whatever
> White faces on move two, Black faces *worse* on move two. And likewise
> for each subsequent move. The only advantage was for White, and it was
> on move one.
I'm talking about the number of positions that have to be prepared for,
not their quality.
> Saying that move one "doesn't require any preparation" discounts the
> fact that White's first move is the ONLY opening that White has to
> practise and prepare.
And you're discounting the fact that the Sicilian and the Caro-Kann are as
different as the king's gambit and the queen's gambit. Black's choice of
his first move contributes as much to the flavour of the game as White's
choice of first move but Black has a greater number of reasonable choices.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Erotic Dish (TM): it's like a fine
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ ceramic dish but it's genuinely
erotic!
|
| | | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 14:55:19
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
En/na David Richerby ha escrit:
> LSD <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's
>>opening preparation is likely better for the White side then the black.
>
> Surely it's the other way round? Imagine two players, Mr White and Mr
> Black who only ever play with one colour. Mr White essentially has a
> choice of three opening moves. If he plays 1.e4, he needs something
> prepared against each of e5, e6, c5 and c6 and needs at least a few ideas
> about how to handle d6, Nf6 and g6; if he plays 1.d4 with 2.c4, he needs
> to know what to do against all forms of the queen's gambit (accepted,
> declined, Slav), the king's Indian, the Gruenfeld, the Benoni and the
> Nimzoindian or queen's Indian. Admittedly, he could play 1.c4 or 1.d4
> with 2.Nf3, which tend to give less flexibility to Black as long as the
> transposition to the 1.d4 2.c4 openings is avoided.
>
> Mr Black, on the other hand, just needs one response to each of white's
> reasonable opening moves. If he plays the Sicilian, he doesn't need to
> know anything at all about the other 1.e4 openings, for example. For
> bonus ks, he can play the Pirc, Modern or Alekhine defences, at which
> he's almost guaranteed to be better-prepared than his opponent at almost
> any level. (On the down side, these openings are relatively difficult to
> play the black side of at most levels.)
> (...)
> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move than
> white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these possibilities.
>
> Dave.
That's depends on the line choosed. Let's see:
Imagine I'm a black player and I need to prepare my KID.
As black I have to study classical variation, samisch, fianchetto
variation, systems with Bg5, 4 pawns attack, Cge2 systems, Bd3 systems,
... but white opnly need to prepare ONE of those alternatives
Or I'm a Sicilan Dragon player.... I need to be prepared to play versus
wing gambit, Morra Gambit, Alapin, Bb5 systems and all open systems like
Rauzer, Be2+Be3 systems, Be2+Bg5 systems, f4 systems, g3 systems.
White as Alapin player can choose to study ONS line versus all sicilians.
AT
|
| | | | |
Date: 07 Oct 2005 12:03:53
From: David Richerby
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected] > wrote:
>En/na David Richerby ha escrit:
>> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
>> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move than
>> white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
>> possibilities.
>
> That's depends on the line choosed. Let's see:
>
> Imagine I'm a black player and I need to prepare my KID. As black I
> have to study classical variation, samisch, fianchetto variation,
> systems with Bg5, 4 pawns attack, Cge2 systems, Bd3 systems, ... but
> white opnly need to prepare ONE of those alternatives
True. I think my feeling here is that the difference between these
various systems in the king's Indian is rather less than, say, the
difference between any variation of the king's Indian and the Nimzo-
indian.
> Or I'm a Sicilan Dragon player.... I need to be prepared to play versus
> wing gambit, Morra Gambit, Alapin, Bb5 systems and all open systems like
> Rauzer, Be2+Be3 systems, Be2+Bg5 systems, f4 systems, g3 systems. White
> as Alapin player can choose to study ONS line versus all sicilians.
Again, this is all true. In this case, I'd argue that the danger in the
Sicilian lies mainly in the open lines. The closed lines can be dealt
with reasonably successfully by adhering to general principles and having
a reasonable idea how the setups work, rather than by learning lots of
lines.
I suppose that, overall, there are three decision points (usually).
White gets to choose the first move; Black gets to choose an opening
system and White chooses a variation within that system. The discussion
is whether this favours White or Black. I'm still of the opinion that it
favours Black but I fully respect your opinion to the contrary. It's not
an easy question.
Dave.
--
David Richerby Technicolor Psychotic T-Shirt (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a fashion statement but
it wants to kill you and it's in
realistic colour!
|
| | | | | |
Date: 10 Oct 2005 16:38:43
From: Antonio Torrecillas
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Hello again David,
My examples were a bit exagerated to rek that there are many
different situations.
For example if white plays 1.e4 He has different approaches versus
Sicilian: He can try Closed or Alapin or Ab5 system who need not much
opening work, and can try to play open lines with Nf3 and d4 and in that
last case He need good lines versus a lot of black systems.
- There are two possible approaches in opening preparation:
(a) To play the critical lines because player feel in them there are
more problems to put to our opponent. With this playrs need to continue
updating their opening knowledge.
(b) To play non critical lines (not searching for perfection) thinking
that player can outplay opponents in the middlegame. Thast's the
approach of people who has not much time to update his usual lines.
Other aspects:
- A good repertoire (critical or calm) should be well designed in order
to obtain similar positions from different choices and to be prepared
for traspositions. That can be achieved more easily with white.
- Today it's very difficult to catch by susprise an opponent, there are
large databases and any player can find a good line versus any opening.
Considering it, a possible idea is to play usually more than one line to
force our opponent to prepare all possible lines.
Answering the question about who (White or Black) has an easier task in
openings... In my particular case I have more problems playing with
black and I use more time preparing systems with black. Curiously my
results with both colors are not much different but I feel more
uncorfortable with black side no matter I'm playing my pet systems.
I have been "chased" in the opening more times with black.
AT
En/na David Richerby ha escrit:
> Antonio Torrecillas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>En/na David Richerby ha escrit:
>>
>>>But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
>>>preparation because he has much more choice about his first move than
>>>white does and white needs to be prepared for all of these
>>>possibilities.
>>
>>That's depends on the line choosed. Let's see:
>>
>>Imagine I'm a black player and I need to prepare my KID. As black I
>>have to study classical variation, samisch, fianchetto variation,
>>systems with Bg5, 4 pawns attack, Cge2 systems, Bd3 systems, ... but
>>white opnly need to prepare ONE of those alternatives
>
> True. I think my feeling here is that the difference between these
> various systems in the king's Indian is rather less than, say, the
> difference between any variation of the king's Indian and the Nimzo-
> indian.
>
>>Or I'm a Sicilan Dragon player.... I need to be prepared to play versus
>>wing gambit, Morra Gambit, Alapin, Bb5 systems and all open systems like
>>Rauzer, Be2+Be3 systems, Be2+Bg5 systems, f4 systems, g3 systems. White
>>as Alapin player can choose to study ONS line versus all sicilians.
>
> Again, this is all true. In this case, I'd argue that the danger in the
> Sicilian lies mainly in the open lines. The closed lines can be dealt
> with reasonably successfully by adhering to general principles and having
> a reasonable idea how the setups work, rather than by learning lots of
> lines.
>
> I suppose that, overall, there are three decision points (usually).
> White gets to choose the first move; Black gets to choose an opening
> system and White chooses a variation within that system. The discussion
> is whether this favours White or Black. I'm still of the opinion that it
> favours Black but I fully respect your opinion to the contrary. It's not
> an easy question.
>
> Dave.
|
| | | | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 19:33:21
From: zell
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
Antonio Torrecillas Wrote:
> En/na David Richerby ha escrit:-
> LSD [email protected] wrote:
> -
> Cause White gets first move, compounded by the fact a given player's
> opening preparation is likely better for the White side then th
> black.-
>
> Surely it's the other way round? Imagine two players, Mr White an
> Mr
> Black who only ever play with one colour. Mr White essentially has a
> choice of three opening moves. If he plays 1.e4, he needs something
> prepared against each of e5, e6, c5 and c6 and needs at least a fe
> ideas
> about how to handle d6, Nf6 and g6; if he plays 1.d4 with 2.c4, h
> needs
> to know what to do against all forms of the queen's gambit (accepted,
> declined, Slav), the king's Indian, the Gruenfeld, the Benoni and the
> Nimzoindian or queen's Indian. Admittedly, he could play 1.c4 o
> 1.d4
> with 2.Nf3, which tend to give less flexibility to Black as long a
> the
> transposition to the 1.d4 2.c4 openings is avoided.
>
> Mr Black, on the other hand, just needs one response to each o
> white's
> reasonable opening moves. If he plays the Sicilian, he doesn't nee
> to
> know anything at all about the other 1.e4 openings, for example. For
> bonus ks, he can play the Pirc, Modern or Alekhine defences, a
> which
> he's almost guaranteed to be better-prepared than his opponent a
> almost
> any level. (On the down side, these openings are relatively difficul
> to
> play the black side of at most levels.)
> (...)
> But I think it's fair to say that black has the edge in opening
> preparation because he has much more choice about his first move than
> white does and white needs to be prepared for all of thes
> possibilities.
>
> Dave.-
>
> That's depends on the line choosed. Let's see:
>
> Imagine I'm a black player and I need to prepare my KID.
> As black I have to study classical variation, samisch, fianchetto
> variation, systems with Bg5, 4 pawns attack, Cge2 systems, Bd
> systems,
> .... but white opnly need to prepare ONE of those alternatives
>
> Or I'm a Sicilan Dragon player.... I need to be prepared to pla
> versus
> wing gambit, Morra Gambit, Alapin, Bb5 systems and all open system
> like
> Rauzer, Be2+Be3 systems, Be2+Bg5 systems, f4 systems, g3 systems.
> White as Alapin player can choose to study ONS line versus al
> sicilians.
>
> AT
but isn t luck factor in itself greater than that 1.26 in 100,000 game
for white
--
zell
|
| | | | | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 21:26:02
From: lightarrow
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
zell Wrote:
> but isn t luck factor in itself greater than that 1.26 in 100,000 game
> for white?
No way, 100,000 is a huge sample. The 95% confidence interval for
sample of 1,000 about 3.5% if I remember correctly
--
lightarrow
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 19:53:55
From: Ron
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
In article <[email protected] >,
lightarrow <[email protected] > wrote:
> > but isn t luck factor in itself greater than that 1.26 in 100,000 games
> > for white?
>
> No way, 100,000 is a huge sample. The 95% confidence interval for a
> sample of 1,000 about 3.5% if I remember correctly.
The problem is that you can't just look at the results in the database -
you need to compare them to the expected results based on Elo.
I recall reading somewhere that the advantage of white was something
like 40 - 60 ELO points. I don't have the exact number in front of me.
|
| | |
Date: 06 Oct 2005 03:33:51
From: lightarrow
Subject: Re: white wins 1.26 more then black?
|
I'm 1899 USCF, but my performance with white is well over 2000. I wen
through a stretch of games of games over the summer where I had blac
12 out of 18 times. This caused my rating to fall from 1934 to as lo
as 1882. I didn't lose any games with white over that stretch. Las
week I had two out of three whites, which resulted in me gaining 1
points. (I won two with white and drew with black). I think my proble
with black might be my opening preparation
--
lightarrow
|
|
