Leela Chess Zero Refutes The Dutch Defense? | Computer Chess Championship Finals

[@chess]

Watch more Computer Chess games here! kzbin.info/aero/PL-qLOQ-OEls7uZ_Kr0zY8AgfYavPtUaH_

[@ryan82scott]

Just a formatting thought: when you are exploring alternate scenarios, have you considered a different coloured board? That might help with differentiating between the actual game and the proposed alternative.

[@danielrensch9238]

RSM82 good thought!

[@raheyna8888]

Is this game from the TCEC going on right now? I can't find this game..

[@sosotik]

And here I am thinking quarantine was supposed to make people like you smarter

[@ryan82scott]

@@sosotik Not sure if I understand the hate... if you think it's a bad idea, go ahead and say so; say why if you can. Certainly not worth the words being directed towards me. It was just a suggestion, not an order or direction. It could easily be ignored or rejected without the garbage.

[@ryan82scott]

@Deep Mind X Why?

[@exponentmantissa5598]

You didnt explain the horizon effect correctly. The horizon effect is when the computer calculates the position out to a large number of ply and heads down that tree branch only to discover that just beyond where its calculations ended (the horizon) the game is dead lost. For instance a computer calculates 32ply deep and it looks favorable but at the next ply level the position is losing. Kasparov played a great game against deep blue in his first match (game 6) where the computer headed down a branch of the tree that had all dead losses. After a couple of moves the computer then sees the correct eval but it is too late, it had passed the point of no return.

[@surfingbilly9654]

best explanation ive seen so far

[@Harrs2]

Yeah, but what Danny said wasn't lengthy and got the point across

[@zergreenone8111]

@@Harrs2 It's possible to explain it simply and correctly. The horizon effect is when an engine doesn't look far enough ahead to accurately evaluate how good a certain move is, it only looks ahead up to a certain "horizon".

[@mahyu21]

Intuition?

[@THEBOYDALEK]

zzzzzzzz

[@derda3209]

stockfish: "thats not a good strategy!" leela: "strategy? chess is only tactics."

[@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649]

True. Lol

[@michaelr1661]

Except Leela is better at strategy than Stockfish. You ain't beating Stockfish easily searching 30 or more (half)moves ahead in tactics

[@MrDannyg77]

Love Danny’s enthusiasm and why wouldn’t he be so animated. Leela’s play in this game is the stuff of legend.

[@Neisey]

Danny Gee for some reason Danny looks like he aged ten years in like two weeks. Maybe he lost weight? Or started doing drugs. Maybe he’s just plain old aging

[@andrejbogdanov2816]

You really excel at these kinds of videos. Thank you very much!

[@danielrensch]

Thanks man!

[@lousyfication]

Exactly! Excelent it is. Thanks a lot.

[@Arc_Soma2639]

"An abusive Russian chess coach would come along and just sweep those off the board and say something like: You are not using them anyway why you want them? And just throw them away" HAHAHAHA MY F** SIDES

[@solomu8772]

Great line. My sides got destroyed.

[@DJHastingsFeverPitch]

A la Searching for Bobby Fischer

[@ozboltmenegatti]

an actual lol moment this was

[@bububuracing62]

Confirmed, that actually happnd to me :-D

[@ilyakalinin2660]

Да, угарнул с этого)

[@Nortindevtech]

That is crazy, one of the most beautiful games I have seen recently. Amazing analysis Danny

[@Menaceirl]

Leela "trolling" is a result of neural networks in all games. They find the path of least resistance more often than they find the "best" way to solve a problem. this can be seen in nearly every implementation of neural networks. Leela may see getting more pieces of the board as simplifying the position just as we do and in turn, would be easier for her to convert.

[@lagerbaer]

This is similar to the tongue-in-cheek advice: "If you can take the opponent's queen, OR mate in 5, you should take the queen".

[@homerp.hendelbergenheinzel6649]

removing the pawn with this troll move also god rid of countless possible stalemate options/positions for black i think.

[@durgeshkulkarni1412]

15:22 "The queen lives for black at the end of variation like this,,unfortunately THE KING DOES NOT" -SIM Daniel Rensch 2020

[@josiahroyer1062]

The operation was successful, but the patient died.

[@DoronBarShay]

Incredible line

[@isehaji3792]

God Save The Queen on that tragic Night at the Opera

[@yoshiboy6198]

I think Leela "trolls" just to get into simpler positions, Leela knows how to win the queen vs rook endgame and the pawn just complicates things a little bit. Giving up the pawn leads to a simpler game which is still a definite win for Leela.

[@italixgaming915]

That's also what I think. I saw another game by Leela where she gave back material because she saw that she was completely winning even with that non optimal move. For humans, keeping their material advantage is a natural trend but Leela doesn't care, as soon as she sees a forced win line, she goes for it and doesn't bother searching another one that would seem more natural to a human.

[@JG-zs8tr]

Yep. Lc0 has learned the entire game "backwards" starting with the end of the game, so she's always just trying to reach a line she already knows to be winning. There's no need for her to experiment and learn about shorter paths to victory if she already has a known victory in sight. This can lead to moves that look like trolling humans; for example, underpromoting pawns to rooks.

[@austinnunez2031]

I forgot where I read or heard but Leela is doing something like cutting out any possibility for loss. She follows the Monte Carlo tree search and once she finds herself winning, she begins to essentially constrict the opponent, slowly taking away any moves that could lead to her loss or draws, stalemates perpetuals etc. It’s the reason she doesn’t finish games quicker, she essentially “trolls” the opponent with a “there’s nothing you can do”. It really is fascinating. She’ll give pieces back just to misplace your pieces and you have absolutely no counterplay to her plan. Total utter domination. Beautiful.

[@tolkienfan1972]

I think it's more that it doesn't matter. They both win. There's a kind of randomness that comes from the weights in a neural net. It's not like it's an more or less effort for a machine. Effort is meaningless here.

[@tolkienfan1972]

@@bishshoy would you prefer it if I used the term unpredictability, Mr Pedantic?

[@unathorizdwatermelon]

Loving the Russian accent danny.

[@danielrensch]

And it loves you!

[@nathansharp3193]

Daniel Rensch, the abusive Russian coach only truly loves the game of chess.

[@1999yasin]

@@nathansharp3193 That description was oddly specific lmao

[@igorm.3114]

As a Russian I had a good laugh there :)

[@tonistaak]

@@danielrensch can you analyse game number 16 where LC0 white lost to Stockfish black

[@StoicTheGeek]

Danny's analysis of 1. d4 f5 - "maybe it was a mouse slip". 😂😂 Absolute gold.

[@mediocre2master9]

I just wanted to say thank you, Danny, for always inspiring my chess improvement with your insight, energy, and understanding of the game. I also wanted to thank you for kicking my ass so convincingly in a bullet brawl in 2015 that I really hunkered down and decided to start improving my game; after some breaks due to college I finally crossed the 2000 online blitz threshold last month. You’re an inspiration, man!

[@mediocre2master9]

Oh he 100% would still win every game 😅

[@mileseramosroman2387]

Wow bullet brawls...good times

[@danielrensch9238]

Way to go man!!!

[@sensorcato]

8:09 1...f4 Qxb2 2.Rb1 Qf6 3. O-O Goosebumps...

[@Nf5]

I wish you said when the opening ended and the engine moves started. @9:20 "that you created Stockfish when you moved your f pawn on move one" I think most people who aren't used to computer chess won't understand that Stockfish didn't decide to play f5.

[@AndyChamberlainMusic]

Next time: Leela Chess Zero refutes 1.e4

[@MrZluvu4ever]

Andy Chamberlain Music perhaps you mean 1.d4!?

[@ihateorphans]

@@MrZluvu4ever Probably 1.a3

[@danielrensch9238]

Ha! Don’t tempt her 😉

[@jeffgreen3376]

1. e4 is easily refuted by 1. c5 (the Sicilian Defense). Also, 1. e6 (the French Defense) can equalize.

[@kdhavle]

I think Alpha Zero did that. AZ never played 1.e4, if I remember right. :)

[@rupen42]

8:23 Ben Finegold says to not play f3, not f4. He often uses his "never play f3" adage to illustrate when to play f4. But yeah, f4 is also a weakening move.

[@Patralgan]

This reminds me of AlphaGo playing Go and sometimes instead of grabbing a large advantage, it would instead play something which seems relatively insignificant. This puzzled many humans. The reason was that since you only need to win by 0.5 points to win the game, AlphaGo would go for smaller advantage if it is more confident it would lead to victory instead going for larger advantage, which is not a safer choice (but in the games they would have been incredibly safe nonetheless). A human player would go for a larger advantage to maximize chances to win.

[@elijahbuscho7715]

So like humans would lean more towards thinking about material, ie. you wouldn't want to sacrifice material if you don't have to, because the more material you have, the more likely you are to win, whereas the computer thinks more in terms of positions, and will play in a way to get to a certain position, from which there are fewer other positions in which they lose. Because really, big advantage doesn't matter, all the matters is enough advantage to get the checkmate.

[@Patralgan]

@@elijahbuscho7715 yeah, I guess that's rather accurate

[@somtovitus]

I love the Russian chess coach joke. Seemed so real.

[@ph6560]

I haven't seen too many of these instructional videos (involving openings) by Rensch in recent times, but really liked his way of presenting the ideas. However, hope he'll continue make much more of these!

[@Radjehuty]

we really don't know why she "trolls" but it always happens when there are numerous winning lines. If you can imagine that all her knowledge comes from playing against herself, it's possible that in enough games to be significant, perhaps she's managed to stalemate herself which caused her to seek lines that are simplified and might explain why she prefers to sac her pieces for the familiar QvK or RvK endgames. It has also caused her to shuffle in to draws from winning positions though. A future(soon) patch is aimed at solving this hopefully.

[@fixpontt]

not trolling, simplifying into tablebase position

[@ddimin]

We DO know why lczero "trolls", it's not related to tablebases (it does this even without tablebase) and it's not because of reducing stalemate chances. It's not chess-specific, AlphaGo does the same. The reason why it does that is because its end criteria is to maximize "winning probability". Lczero just don't know the difference between two moves if it is sure that they are both winning, so it just chooses randomly.

[@ddimin]

@@danispringer It's because if you ten times toss a coin then 99.9% of the cases you get at least one heads. Same here: lczero has many opportunities to sack material.

[@DJHastingsFeverPitch]

@@fixpontt that may be true, except I don't believe that Leela has tablebases? I could be wrong?

[@fixpontt]

@@DJHastingsFeverPitch go to tcec webpage, you can see after every move that how many tablebase position L0 found in that move, it does not use that as extensively as Stockfish but it uses it nonetheless

[@ZodiacKillerSFPD]

Great video. Your analysis was as evident as your enthusiasm!

[@danielrensch]

Appreciate that.

[@PiercingSight]

I watched this game live and freaked out in the chat with everyone else starting from d6. From d6 it was clear that Leela was just going to crush positionally and not only did she do that, but she also crushed tactically, and taking black's queen was one of the most thrilling moments to watch. We had a party in the chat. Absolutely incredible game! Thank you for the analysis!

[@wayneliang4524]

Because the algorithm would only be changed when lost,the " trolling " moves or the unnecessary moves wouldn't be ruled out as long as it's winning, therefore it still plays it

[@adamstone5865]

That picture had me laughing so hard, “one does not simply play f4” so well done and all chess players can appreciate that

[@omarabdelhafiz]

The caption says f5

[@EwanMellor]

Great analysis, but that’s totally not why it’s called a “horizon effect”. It’s because you can only see so far ahead before things are hidden below the horizon. No matter how much you understand about what’s close (imminent moves), a depth search like Stockfish’s won’t help with what’s beyond the horizon.

[@ig2d]

the sac of the queen is because of the Table base. sacking the queen is not the shortest path to mate but it is the shortest path to a winning entry on the tablebase

[@JV-ge8bm]

Don’t tell Simon Williams!

[@gonzalo4658]

Jared Vu you’re goin to hell for that

[@reidpattis9478]

Come on 'arry.

[@12jswilson]

Leela gives and it takes. It refutes the Dutch, but shows that h4 is almost never a bad move

[@davidcopson5800]

BOOM!

[@justdavelewis]

Shane Wilson I think Simon would be ok if he knew that a gambit and pushing Harry was a Dutch refutation, I think that’s the only situation he’d be ok with

[@rhalleballe]

Actually, i played this game with Komodo 13.3, and after move 19. Rg4 Komodo shows up black Rf6 as best move for black, but still with big disadvantage (-1.7) for black! So Komodo did it right! If Rf2 instead, Komodo plays: 20. Rxg6 Qe4, 21. Rg3! Qxe2, 22. Qxe2 Rxe2, 23. Bh6 etc. with total demolition (even without Queens!).

[@ig2d]

I absolutely love your commentary.. If you're looking for another game to analyse check out tcec game 35. A classic sicilian dragon with all the standard motifs you would come to expect (opposite casting pawn storms on both wings exchange sac on c3 etc...) played briliantly by both entities... At 5:17 it seems like black might just get away with e6(?)

[@johannesb9681]

This is the best game I have seen this year so far. Amazing stuff

[@younis24de]

8:22 Ben Finegold never disapproved of f4. Pawn to f3 on the other hand…

[@haykmanukyan5462]

great! wanna see more analyses by Dani Rensch

[@christopherhume1631]

I lived in AZ until May of 1999 and began to get back into Chess during that period. Tal Shaked was a young rising star then. He had a Chess Column, which I believe appeared in the Arizona Republic for a time. I imagine you would have been aware of this growing up. I have been enjoying your humor, analysis and instructive approach for several years now. Always fun to watch you and Hess quarrel.

[@durgeshkulkarni1412]

Great dedication to stream the video just after finishing an analysis, Danny!! PS- The last part where you mentioned why would any neural network want the game to last longer than it should will keep me driving all day, motivates me to search more on NN and Machine Learning !!! :-D

[@pantsik2]

Great stuff! I would like to learn more about Leela trolling with sacrificing pieces that lead to longer mate paths. It seems like Leela is prefering fewer pieces on board and longer mates that more pieces and shorter mates.

[@AmorLucisPhotography]

Lovely game. Thanks for explaining it. As a fan of the Dutch (Stonewall) and after getting stung by the Staunton Gambit too many times, I now only enter the Dutch by transposition.

[@iliyzavialov3199]

So much passion in commentary, amazing)) btw much better then agad does in these days

[@MrLimon27]

Superb! Thank you for bringing us these amazing games with deep analysis.

[@wendestein9092]

thanks for both the good analysis and humor Daniel!

[@willlacey7621]

Daniel’s commentary is always, without a doubt, top notch. Even throwing that bit about his boys playing table tennis cracked me up.

[@poprockssuck87]

If I had to guess, I would say that Leela "trolls" because reinforcement learning has a reward structure. Leela is probably set up so that it rewards incrementally throughout the game rather than just once right at the end for a win. This is because it makes it faster to train the neural network, though it may not lead to the most optimal results (but those most optimal results may not be practically attainable anyway). Therefore, the neural net probably prioritizes winning most of all, but if it can be winning for the longest number of moves, that's better because it receives a bigger reward. That, or Leela is mainly focused on winning independent of the number of moves it takes. It may just focus on the likelihood of winning for a given position rather than winning in the most precise way.

[@perfect_harmony4348]

Wouldnt it shuffle around alot more in winning positions by that logic? If you were right the optimal game strategie would be to get a as many twofold repetitions and as close to 50 moves as possible in each winning position to maximize the move counter

[@poprockssuck87]

@@perfect_harmony4348 Once it finds a continuation that ends the game, it chooses that. The neural network just makes the process of evaluating open-ended positions less contrived because there's very little human manipulation of the evaluation process.

[@dtracers]

@@perfect_harmony4348 it often does. It is something we are actively trying to fix. Because it can lead to her losing winning position because she waits so long

[@vecter]

@@dtracers do you work on Lc0?

[@Jaycafka]

Great video, thank you! It was not only entertaining but also very educational.

[@sensorcato]

*Bobby Fischer:* e4 is best by te- *Leela:* I just refuted it. *Bobby Fischer:* 😨

[@jeffgreen3376]

I think that the Sicilian Defense refuted 1. e4 long ago. lol

[@Bustical]

The first move (for both colours) were chosen by humans The first move Leela played was 2.e4

[@nicholasperkins4655]

@@jeffgreen3376 Leela's opinion on the Sicilian is an interesting one. She actually thinks the Moscow variation (Bb5+) is white's best option against the d6 Sicilan, however her favorite form of the Sicilian are the e6 variations. Yasser Seirawan would be pleased. Because of how ECO codes work, I am uncertain what Leela prefers as white against the e6 Sicilian. I know Bobby Fischer preferred the KIA.

[@jeffgreen3376]

@@nicholasperkins4655 Interesting. I have more trouble with the Exchange Rossolimo/Moscow Variation than most other tries by white (I play 2. Nc6 and 3. d6 in most Sicilians). I can beat the Exchange Rossolimo (3. Bb5) with a 2. e6 system, but it doesn't work well for me in other (non-Bb5) lines, so I normally stick with an early d6, but often play e6 or g6 a few move later (on moves 4--8) and transpose into a Scheveningan or Dragon Sicilian.

[@latibes]

Kingcrusher: Stockfish has 'spectator' pieces

[@vecter]

Look at them! They're all spectators!! [in British]

[@nicholasperkins4655]

They are off in Siberia!

[@funchable212]

Amazing. Please make more of this type of video Danny you’re the man!

[@visiblethoughts]

Danny is the best commentator ever. I could listen to him talk about about the color brown.

[@alexnaturalis1179]

I never thought chess commentary could be so entertaining. Killing it Daniel!

[@plane_riotous4202]

A beautiful game indeed. Daniel’s presentation along with teaching and analysis is spectacular. Plenty of effort and time he’s been dedicated for this video. I really loved it and thank you very much for that. Stay safe, stay sane🤪

[@DuncanEduardo]

Brilliant and intelligent chess commentary and analysis. Great raconteur. Amazing game

[@GinjouArmy]

00:58 D-man spitting a few quick bars.

[@JoeBruin96]

.Absolutely love the thumbnail. Oh and Danny you’re the best

[@chrissears2395]

I think the trolling simplification when Leela sacks Q for R is because she sees a 7 piece tablebase win which is a Good Thing. Maybe the pawn discard (it's not even a sac) is for the longest win, yeah, playing with her food.

[@bhgtree]

Wonderful game and commentary, this has just become one of my alltime favourite Leela games. Thanks Danny.

[@perakojot6524]

16.f5 is a clear oversight by SF due to LMR (late move reduction, i.e. aggressive move pruning algorithm of SF). That is a (rare) example of position where human+engine is much more powerful than engine. It would have been enough for human to run SF in MPV mode and explore a couple of moves in advance, i.e. what would be a typical correspondence player strategy. And it would easily see that just two moves earlier instead of 14. .. Qf5, b5 equalizes by opening the left side and activating those inactive pieces. Also, Kh8 equalizes by removing that weak king position on white square. So, essentially before 14. .. Qf5 blunder of SF position was equal. Since SF has such an aggressive LMR it takes it to reach depth 46 on move 14 before it can actually see that Qf5 is a blunder.

[@chesscomdpruess]

OMG! Danny and Leela just blew my mind a dozen times!

[@lasker500]

incredible play by Leela. So much to discover with this new engine.

[@leavethebasket7435]

Fucking love Danny he's so funny and charismatic, not to mention a fantastic teacher

[@alchemist9461]

Great game! Thank you for the coverage! That 19...Rf2 20. Rxg6! Qe4 21. Rxg7! Kxg7 22. Nf4!! just stuned me! Just wonderful!

[@abhishekrnair3911]

If anyone knows the M20 computer vs David Bronstien chess match, you can see that the computer lost as it was taking all of David's pieces. It was programmed in such a way that the more pieces you have, the more chances you have to win. But David takes positional advantage by sacing pieces. And today you see that Lc0 is programmed and learned in such a way that positional advantage is very much more important than some pieces. With this I personally feel that chess would be a really competitive game for the generations to come (when I say competitive, I mean that there is a chance players may have 3200/3300 rating) since there teachers are going to be these present beasts like Lc0. What are your thoughts about this?

[@Aoltooliol]

Leela doesn't troll. It's just that when there are several winning lines she picks the one where she has to do the least amount of calculation. It's just efficiency.

[@Zen-rl5pv]

Not going to lie the only thing better than these games is your commentary, love it haha

[@thorstenjaeger1203]

Great stuff for me!!! I like to play the Staunton and I LOVE(!) Queen vs. Rook, studying that for months(!?!). Thanks a lot!!!

[@JimMalmPHOTO]

What flare. I could listen to this guy all day.

[@Nidhogg86]

Good stuff. Anyone else wanna see Seirawan chess, S-Chess, SHARPER or whatevs with the engines going at it? It would be great to just have it available online somewhere, as the two extra pieces of dynamism should have at least us and probably also the neural networks busy for quite a while with all the new possible complications available.

[@-_Nuke_-]

For the crazy endgames I believe that (btw I really believe that...) the engineers made leela look for the hardest way to finish an endgame, so that it can not only destroy Stockfish in fashion but also teach us and educate us even more on those crazy endgames where you are up a queen against a rook. So I think Danny is correct. There could be another technical reasons... Maybe Lc0 the way the code is written is just easier for her to look for those book endgames rather than discovering them herself, but either way we are having a good lesson out of these positions for sure!

[@BettyCastella]

I think the reason leela made that bizarre queen sacrifice at the end is that she, like most chess engines, has memorized all endgames involving 6 pieces, and so she knew that if she sacrificed the queen, she could win without having to think, wheras if she pushed the pawns, she'd have to think for a bit longer. You ask "why make the game take longer than it needs to?" but actually for her, it makes the game shorter, in terms of milliseconds on her chess clock.

[@gonzalo4658]

This is the kind of daniel rensch that i like

[@dannygjk]

Leela's MCTS approach leads 'her' to safer areas of the tree *when Leela can't see a concrete win*. That imo is why you see apparent trolling.

[@Earwaxfire909]

Beautiful game and great analysis. Thank you!

[@MrRobbyvent]

From the title I'm looking to check for a new theory against the dutch defence. But who's going to play like that? Giving up pawns and even pieces, having your pieces hanging. Undertaking for a line that is looking forward 5 moves ahead making sure that is rock solid from every point of view. This is too scary for any human. Can't learn too much from that apart having enjoied a beautiful looking game.

[@ehatipo4598]

you. are. crazy. good. Please more tournaments with gingergm etc. we all here to watch! Thank you for the crazy content!!!

[@maxtsivourakis137]

Thanks for making these videos Danny

[@twoking10]

All of Stockfish Queen side pieces totally tied up. Leela down material by one minor piece in the count, yet... in one sense Leela is actually ahead in material because Stock has 3 pieces that can't seem to get in the game.

[@xzjulius]

She’s not trolling. The way neural networks works work in chess are by number of possible moves being computed. By eliminating both of those pieces it makes calculations easier on the network. Just less variations. That’s why Leela will consider promote to a knight first because it has the lease number of variations or moves leading to mate.

[@trias418]

Once a game is in a won position, there's no pressure on the neural network to refine its play at all in its learning process. So you'd expect some pretty random moves while in a won position (as long as they don't jeopardize the win).

[@seasideman]

Amazing game, thanks for the great analysis Danny.

[@-_Nuke_-]

That was absolutely mindblowing! I have a playlist called "games of awe" and this is definitely going right in there! But I have a question for you Danny, do these 2 engines use pondering on or not? Pondering in the chess computer world is when you allow an engine to be "turned on" when the other engine is playing... With pondering off, Lc0 cannot think - cannot analise after playing a move on Stockfish time, but with pondering on, if Stockfish takes 5 minutes to think - those 5 minutes Lc0 is also thinking and re-evaluating the position... So my question is: Are these engines using Pondering? Are they allowed to ponder on the opponent's time or not? And if not why?

[@ZorbaPress]

Incredible game -- thanks Leela and Daniel.

[@dustinarand]

I was thinking of your speculation that Leela might have been trolling Stockfish and my mind jumped to this scene from Michael Crichton's book The Lost World where the mama T-Rex cripples this dude and then lets her hatchling finish him off. She could have killed the dude much more easily, but she wanted to give her baby some practice. I think a better explanation of Leela's actions in the game is that she recognizes she has a good probability of a win either way, but also that some parts of her game are weaker than others (maybe Q vs. R endgames) and she wanted to give herself the opportunity to practice to strengthen those skills. That way she's not only pursuing her core directive of winning but also the metadirective of making it easier to win future games as well.

[@AnnoShark]

awesome stuff again! thanks for the great analysis. would be really interested how Lela uses the Dutch from the Black side. any analysis coming for one of these games?

[@vanessaingenhoff4343]

So called Leela Troll Moves: 72. a7 instead of h5 75. Qf8 instead of g4 81. Qc1 instead of Qc2+ 85. Qxb6 instead of g6! (85. g6 Rb1 86. Qxb6 wins a tempo) 101. d7 instead of Qf6 (converting a mate in 11 to a mate in 28)

[@JimJWalker]

"She plays with her food..." LMAO

[@youuuuuuuuuuutube]

At 20:50, Leela's trained to win games by maximising the probability to win, not to win "short" games, also she's using tablebase, so at this point, it makes no difference to give up that pawn, because it's a 100% win anyway.

[@rickkarras9708]

Love the screen shot

[@kamvamatsila7576]

I Love This guy! very funny and insightful!

[@guyscounter]

The sales of GM Simon's Rebooted Killer Dutch will be halted.

[@MrZluvu4ever]

Thanks to Danny & Leela Chess Zero, we will no longer be terrorized by the Dutch Defense ever again, now what do we do after 1.d4 f5 again!!?

[@friedrichroell4018]

Great video Danny, cheers!

[@john2001plus]

Endgame tablebases is why Lela played the ending the way she did. She saw that it was forced mate all the way to the end.

[@jeffgreen3376]

Yeah, the Dutch Defense leaves weaknesses on e6 and g6, which is why I never played it. The same could be said of the Bird's Opening or Stonewall Attack for white, although white's extra tempo might make up for it (not sure though). The Dutch holds up well in the opening, but not in the middlegame, due to those weak squares.

[@xplicitmike]

That is an incredible game. Thank you for the analysis.

[@bwatspro]

These are my favourite kind of videos :D Danny the best

[@glenncooper3524]

Aren't the first 15 moves openings there forced to play. Plus I looked twice couldn't find this final position or opening

[@ceferinojrvizco5832]

Tnx for sharing ..i realy enjoy watching it wit analisis

[@ugood]

Thank you Danny 💗

[@FabioMarziali]

why would stockfish play the dutch?? so many more solid responses available....

[@RKBenchmarker]

Wow, brilliant analysis on a brilliant game!

[@mattjensen3499]

Great video Danny!

[@danielrensch9238]

Matt Jensen thanks Matt!