#1 · MisterCat
23 Jan 2020
Here is the direct link to the new analysis page:
The fake game stub #2142725 contains no moves.
To see the ACTUAL game, visit:
(meow)
Public forum discussion.
23 Jan 2020
Here is the direct link to the new analysis page:
The fake game stub #2142725 contains no moves.
To see the ACTUAL game, visit:
(meow)
26 Jan 2020
I won't start a new thread for this. There is a 4th (and last) page for analysis of this game. The game should be over soon.
Direct link: The World vs. Twixtbot analysis
the ACTUAL game remains as above: Game # 2140447
?
29 Jan 2020
The team of human beings has triumphed over the machine! I will say more, later.
(meow)
?
29 Jan 2020
Someday, robots will rule the world. BUT NOT TODAY!
Way to go, Team!
29 Jan 2020
The bot made a couple of unusual moves in the opening. We defeated it by making super solid moves, nothing flashy.
I hope a stronger version will be made available. How about spending 12 hours per move?
29 Jan 2020
There's a chance something stupid like running out of memory might happen, but we can certainly give it a try if people want. It's easy to change the "50,000" to "7,000,000" and see what happens.
29 Jan 2020
Well maybe you could start a different account and call it SlowTwixt? Not everyone agrees with me. Thanks for your trouble. I hope you will still be able to use your computer!
29 Jan 2020
HUMANS!!!
29 Jan 2020
Amazing job guys!
29 Jan 2020
GG (-;
29 Jan 2020
Well done, boys! I feel (and I can only write "feel") that TwixtBot is weaker in the opening. When he finds a tactical weakness, there is no hope for anyone. As a one cent advice, it can be tried to modify the 50,000 figure to, for example, 500,000 only for the first moves, using some more time for the opening. For the remanining part of the game, 50,000 is enough.
29 Jan 2020
By the numbers:
28 days, 2 hours, 21 minutes.
37 pegs.
0 links in the first 16 pegs (43% of the game).
20 links in the 21 pegs that followed, 14 by humans and 6 by the bot.
20 decisions made by humans, starting with the decision of whether to let the bot go first.
695 comments.
10 participants.
Participation by percentage of comments:
22.7% nie_wiesz (Maciej)
21.7% MisterCat
19.6% twixter (David Bush)
18.0% spd_iv (Michal)
9.0% Florian Jamain
5.8% Alan Hensel
2.7% bob440
% BonyJordan
% DrJochum
% ypercube
30 Jan 2020
Thanks for those stats, Alan. Interesting, but 'percentage of comments' might be modified to 'percentage of GOOD comments'; then, I'll drop right to the cellar! LOL
(meow)
30 Jan 2020
100% agreed with David, we did not play anything "flashy" just very solid moves in the opening, it is enough to take the advantage again the Bot, in the very first moves he is not playing really well so we took our time there to secure an advantage and then just no blunder and it was a win.
30 Jan 2020
Congrats @humans, @TwitBot, could you please provide figures, statistics or logs about the thinking process and when did the bot know that it was behind?
31 Jan 2020
Good job guys! We've proved that we are more than just a numbers (at least more than "50000") ;-)
1 Feb 2020
This experiment was great fun!
Thank you to all who participated and especially to MisterCat for initiating it!!
1 Feb 2020
Even I have not participated actively I really enjoyed just looking at this game. As David wrote, the strategy was very really solid, nevertheless some moves were far from obvious, not cliche ones. Building the left side was very impressive for me. In general humans controlled the game. After every human's move there was a big question: did the bot find out some vulnerability or did he surprise playing some unexpected move. But he did not.
Congrats for the win and for the style!
1 Feb 2020
Hey all - have a look-see at the official game link over in commentator! BonyJordan has provided some very interesting data - revealing what Twixtbot thought was the best line of play at each move, and also it's numerical analysis of the position. At a glance, it seems that it ALWAYS thought it was behind (negative evaluations throughout), but when the evaluation got below -.85 (as explained by Jordan), it finally resigned.
Were we REALLY winning after only one move? Or two? This, to me, is hard to understand, although that opinion WAS given by some of The Team - especially by Florian, who insisted that Twixtbot plays poorly in the opening, so that the key is to take advantage of weak opening play and right at the start, and then follow through with powerful moves to maintain and increase that advantage - never letting go.
You can have a look here:
http://twixt-commentator.duckdns.org/game/2140447
the ACTUAL game remains as above: Game # 2140447
?
1 Feb 2020
DrJochum - thanks for the kind nod.
David J Bush - it appears that you got your wish; see the new player 'TwixtbotSLOW'. If this is the 7,000,000 version, may Heaven help us all!
(meow)
2 Feb 2020
It's only 2 million ; I run out of memory at 7 million.
2 Feb 2020
I'm curious about 29. g12, after which black resigns. Does it help o12 at all? Admittedly I haven't spent much time studying the position.
3 Feb 2020
TD, hole O12 is already taken. You meant something else. I added a possible winning line for TBSlow at Twixt Commentator here:
http://twixt-commentator.duckdns.org/game/2145064
Note that TBSlow has already defeated TB in their first encounter; I expect more results of this type.
mc
3 Feb 2020
No, I mean does it help me peg at o12, I.e.,does it serve a double purpose, in view of the fact that black promptly resigned? If l9 etc works without the exchange g12-f11, it looks redundant.
3 Feb 2020
Does it help *the peg