Computer Cheater Plays a Ridiculous Queen Sacrifice
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 12 июн 2018
- It was confirmed after the game that my opponent was indeed using computer assistance :(
Twitch: bit.ly/2JnuTtI
Twitter: bit.ly/2sFmNqa
Instagram: bit.ly/2HspaBa
Website: bit.ly/2JGqVA1 
Игры
This is among the most ice cold savage winning tactics I've ever seen. Props to GM Stockfish for finding the win!
Tho the first move (Qd5) isn't hard to consider... then tho I wanna see any human calculating all the lines and finding the courage to play that
PlayerForSerendipity agreed
@@francescopremsolidoro3858 Qd5 is mate in one if pawn takes. Courage to play mate in one?
it is a gm level + puzzle. if any human could even solve it. This is the full on 3500 level.
Your comment should be pinned
"Chess is difficult, when you fully involve yourself and still have no idea whats going on." My entire existence lol
I think this describes life for most people 😂
chess is life!
I may be mishearing Mr. Rosen, but at around 31 minutes it sounds like he says: "his moves... Are these moves"
@@eric-rosen LOL! :-D
Quantum chess
31:09 -- The Queen sac occurs here.
I skipped to 10 seconds before that in the video, paused it, and found the sac easily.
ytmndman that’s pretty elite
wow, you are told there's a queen sac then you find it. Amazing.
Well yeah it is easier to find if you know it's there
ytmndman i read the comments then the position occurred, i paused and found nothing. I have 2100 rating so are you a titled player?
Eric : Chooses not to look at an old game against the same guy to get insights because its unethical
Opponent : Uses engine against him to win
His reaction to a super computer is my reaction to ordinary 900 players when they beat me.
lmfao i was listening to it in the background while reading this comment and it should be a meme
Dude, how can a 900 rated player actually beat someone ...
Andress Style a 900 player beats a 900 player once in every two games
Andress Style You were once beaten by lower than 900 players, stay delusional
@@vit9480 yeah, but now for me it looks Impossible to lose against a 900 player .
In the bottom right corner at the end you can actually see that the computer analysis says "0 blunders, 0 mistakes, 0 inaccuracies" about the white game.
That's actually pretty common in games that aren't complicated
curtisw0234 unless your opponent keeps blundering and you play the possible best if not good moves
curtisw0234 No, it’s not. Barely ever even happens to GMs in long time controls.
@@curtisw0234 inaccuracies are anything less than losing a pawn, its impossible to not have any.
@@fakerfish1881 what is your rating surely not above 2200
Eric Rosen: i'm in awe of whats he's just done
Stockfish: Too weak, too slow
Eric: “wooOOOW”
Eric: spend 7 minutes to play a natural pawn move
The opponent: *sac his queen (twice) in 6 seconds*
The people in chat: it seems legit
Wow this was so sad Alexa play chesspacito
aHAha
Legendary meme
Yes
Hectic Binary Rapid Degeneration *Dead
HAHAHAHAa
this is kinda difficult to watch seeing eric try so hard. of course nobody stands even the slightest chance against stockfish, but it still made my heart hurt a little. he perseveres through what is obviously an intense mental exercise against extremely unfair odds. he’s such a wholesome guy, and he handled this in the best way possible in my opinion. took it as a learning experience and didn’t get angry. gained so much respect for this guy in less than 30 minutes
it made me smile when he said at the end how it was an instructive learning experience and how he'll show it to his students, was absolutely baffled when he was able to make light of that game
Magnus did bit stockfish a few times didnt he? I know Alpha0 took it for a walk
@@sliceoflife5812 In this time format it might be possible to draw against it if you come into it with preparation but winning is hopeless
@@sliceoflife5812 Huh? Nobody can beat a computer?
@@jaideepshekhar4621no
To those who says the sac is obivous: yeah, if the sac is accepted, it looks crushing, but you also have to calculate if the sac is refused, which is much harder.
i like that Eric didn't immediately suspect cheating, instead he gave respect and was "in awe" of the good moves. the cheating made for a legitimately good video :) thanks, Eric!
It's bad form to publicly call someone out for cheating. In some cases if the person makes money from chess you could even face legal action. It's best to wait until lichess determines they are a cheater which happened after the video was recorded of course
@@curtisw0234 what country do you live in? Dumb if you're usa cuz slander laws r not that strict here
Clifton100 Idk it might be. Defamation law suits might apply.
He kept making sly comments that it was an engine
@@curtisw0234 Rosen I believe has the right to tell if someone may be using computer assistance. Why do I know this? Because he actually knows what he is talking about 😂
I knew something was Stockfishy when he traded that rook for a bishop
@JL-CptAtom
Rooks are more helpful in getting a checkmate and controlling files later on, so they're valued higher.
@Dominus Providebit
He's not playing Magnus he's playing someone whose not even an IM
Something Stockfishy haha best pun ever :D
@@StrengthScholar0 Not to mention the exchange sacrifice doesn't even lead to any huge positional advantage immediately, although in hindsight he loses vital control of the dark squares
Honestly all in all you can say it was a perfect game from white. Even if you argue that the knight and queen sacrifice could be found but the whole game was too good starting from BA3 when he stopped black from castling. Every move was like best move. I think a human could play this good but not in a 20 min game.
I like how you said in the beginning it would be unerhical to look at the two games you playd before
If he was really ethical he wouldn't use the computer drawing arrows and the like to essentially "take notes" when he is determining his next move. Try something like that in a real over-the-board tournament and the TD will punish you for cheating. No memory aids or notes are allowed when you are playing. You shouldn't even write your move down until after you have made it on the board.
Laurence Battin I don‘t think that drawing arrows is unethical, because it‘s a legal tool provided by lichess and furthermore it‘s really helpful for me as a viewer to understand Erics‘ thought process.
@@someolddude3858 over the board has its own rules. Online chess has different rules.
@@someolddude3858 He's doing it for the viewers not himself.
Some Old Dude you seem rather agitated. Was your lichess username ”Suprememonk” by chance?
I like how he still takes something positive out of it, and thanks his opponent for a wonderful move to teach to his students. Now that's the attitude of a passionate teacher.
Spectacular game, it's a shame that it's computer assisted and you were on the back end of it but still there is some positive outcome out of this mess, a beautiful position to show.
Agreed. Would make for a great chess puzzle.
And supreme got banned
@@eduarditoz3941 Thats the best part
Chess is one of the few games where you play against a cheater but still say "wow that was cool move".
i wonder what computer assistance cheats looks like in other perfect information games other than Chess. it would be funny to make one for something like Trackmania Nations Forever
@@Wilker_uwu they already have bots for trackmania, that workout shortcuts automatically
@@Drew-jy7dl wait, really? for most of what i've known about Trackmania's history, all of the ghosts in the game are pre-recorded, while there's people in the community trying to build machine learning stuff for the game. where can i find these bots?
I don't play Go, but I'd also assume the same there.
So as I played this video I played all the moves with a chess sim. It's clear that the opponent is doing the same. What is great though, is Eric searching for calculations and predictions from the human mind and the amount of stress it is causing him. Well played Eric!
"I see a draw though" drawing against a computer is pretty good
Drawing against good engine on decent hardware is not possible for humans, no matter what you do
@@rykehuss3435 The Stockfish on Lichess is not run on decent hardware. Actually, people like Jonathan Shrantz have beaten this version of Stockfish with special prep in the Stafford and Nakhmanson, and Magnus managed to get a drawing endgame against it. Mind you, it's still stronger than any human on Earth, but it's definitely not unbeatable.
This is in addition to the many comments about finding out that SupremeMonk's account is flagged as a computer user.
If you check his games before this one, he has won 16 in a row and 18 out of 19. Overall, 94 wins in 105 games. Most of his losses are when he started playing in Lichess.
Pretty strong evidence of a cheater in my opinion.
classic mad cuz bad
Yes especially considering he lost to a 1700 with check mate
Of a pretty stupid cheater, for that matter
@@auralbalm The 1700 was also using Stockfish.
Guess what a cheater’s favorite food is?…………… PUMPKINS‼️😁
I really admire players who go out of their way to give the cheater the benefit of the doubt, especially after such a loss. "it's entirely possible a human could find that move." It's especially satisfying when the player gets caught cheating later on. Props :)
When did he get caught ?
SupremeStockfish played well here.
Eric is so wholesome he even gave him credit and said dang that’s why he took so long before Ng5yop
Crazy queen sac that seems unfindable but still so logical once shown.
Not hard to find for an expert!
@@joannewilson6577 maybe in a very long OTB game it's realistic but with those time controls very hard to spot
@@Tobi-pn2xs Have you ever see an IM like John Bartholomew or like IM Altonian play blitz games against a 2000 uscf....it's like seeing a good player play chess against a beginner.
The speed and the huge knowledge is very impressive.
@@joannewilson6577 yeah you do have a point, especially after I've seen Nakamura vs Gingergm but for a non title player, it's really unlikely to find
@@Tobi-pn2xs and remember when some one is very tired because he has been playing non stop for for hours and he chat at the same time he cannot play has well has if he was rested.
Whenever somebody seems like they are cheating against me then I let the computer analyze. If he played perfectly then I check his other games to see if this was a fluke. If all are perfect, I report him to the lichess CIA (Cheating Investigation Association or smth)
Someone could easily mix in blunders while cheating and go undetected
Or play normal in the opening and cheat in middlegame
Cheaters aren't smart. If they were they wouldn't cheat on freaking lichess.
@@janehrahan5116 what are you talking about?
I've had quite a few games 0 mistake 0 blunders ect it does happen and i'm only a 1700 -1800 player ,depends on the game if it's highly complex and you get a 0 0 0 then yeah probably cheating ,but you'd be wrong to assume all 0 games are cheaters
I would be livid if someone cheated me so blatantly. Way to stay so calm and turn it into a positive.
Lichess will return you any ranking points you lost to that cheater.
What about points you won to a cheater?
@ktbDash A bit late but I presume sometimes they might lose on purpose or play some non-optimal moves to make themselves look less suspicious.
@@kama2106 . Hilarious concept!
His rating provisional
You need to get better so you can beat these computers lol
Yeah, get better than Carlsen. Sure, easy peasy.
Even Carlsen cannot beat a computer, they can think of billions of combinations
Best chess computers/engines are far far ahead from humans now.
Carlsen ELO something like 2900 last time I checked. Stockfish 9 ELO 4000+. Chess engines would make any human look like a toddler.
Yeah, he's a total noob. He can't even beat bots!
the queen move is like one of those puzzles which asks you to find the most insane move
Not at all for an expert 2000 elo.
man, seeing this was so painful. I know the feeling of being destroyed more than i would like to, even if it is against a computer.
you just need to get better scrub
I don't know why but I keep coming back to this video after all these years
That queen sacrifice was crazy. I don't think I would have ever found that move regardless of how much time given. I saw the point after the move but too bad that it was a computer move. If a human had played it, I would wonder if Tal was reborn.
“Yeah let’s stop talking now.. 1 second later, yeah c3 is a move!”
the rook and then knight sacrifice look more suspicious than the queen sac
Everyone should give this man a hand for fighting Alpha zero and doing a pretty good job.
Surprising not to hear a word on move 9, cxd4, the move from which it all goes downhill. It turns out the pawn is not defendable. Trying to defend it only prevents you from castling, connecting rooks, and developing the bishop. After move 9, cxd4, you don't have a single move to breathe.
@Elementary Watson Doesn't matter who you're playing against, if your pieces are uncoordinated on the back rank and your greedy queen is soloing like a headless chicken in the enemy camp.
@Elementary Watson Peter is right, you are wrong. Suck it up.
I think you just had to click stock fish on
"If you feel nervous, just don't be nervous."
For everyone who ask: "How do you know he is cheating?!"
1. think for yourself and L2P to spot it for yourself.
2. Watch the entire game, exspecially the moves from 11:00 and later. ->
2a) White loses a rook for a piece and get powerfull Attack: f6 weakens the kingside. With only a few minutes of thinking several moves ahead with this kind of sacrifife is nearly impossible to spot in a quickgame.
2b) Qc4 is also a very weird move to which sacrificaes again a pawns. d2
2c) even without the mistake Qa5 there are several hidden attacks for white. It's imbossible to spot them in such a shoirt amount of time without cheating.
3. White took his time on moves that are actually part of the combination, while a move that starts or force the combination are done withing seconds....! It's actually the other way around. White tries to fake human behaviour, but he fails.
You can't help but smile yourself at those shots of Fabiano grinning. Be good if he's smiling like that in November after the match.
Gothamchess brought me here
it´s strange how obvious it seems to play that AFTER you saw it. it´s so obscure.
it's level 1800 elo tactic....and it take 2 or 3 min to find-he didn't because he was under pressure...
"If you're feeling nervous, just don't be nervous"
-Some very wise man, somewhere
I actually saw that knight move with the discovered rook attack, but I would never find such an insane queen move!
More than the queen sac i liked the coordination of his pieces. After sac the exchange your pieces looks kinda ridiculous your rooks were never active and so does the c8 bishop so you had to find cheapos with your queen (Basic chess rules don't move the same piece too many times). And then when you made the position more unbalanced with b5 (amazing move) he just keeps everything coordinate in this very extraordinary way. Not sure about what computer says but does Ng5 Qd5 are the only advantage moves? i tried to find ideas like you and it seems like you manage to organize your pieces if not for that bizarre sequence, and then you're just up an exchange.
I will definitely show this game to my students if you won't mind.
דור טמבור some info on the lessons you offer please?
и
A computer see many moves ahead on each move......my 22 years old computer saw both moves in 2 min at level 6 but not at level 5....at level 6 he think 8 to 10 half moves ahead all the time...at level 5 he see mates in 8 half moves ahead...he has 8 level plus an infinite level.....
And he feel no pressure and no distraction....;)
he is only 1900 ELO at level 7.
What's crazy about this position is once you're looking for a queen sacrifice the entire game, I feel it's a fairly obvious queen sac, but I'd never find that move without knowing in advance ever in my life
That's called confirmation bias. They have no clue, but when a person plays a ridiculous move, they say it's obvious. It's why cheaters are given benefit of doubt.
I found Ng5, but only because I had been looking at Qf4 when you were considering where to escape to with your queen before you went Qb2. Even then I only stumbled onto it as a way to unleash the rook onto the queen, but then the queen would just take the knight and escape to safety, or trade with the other queen if the knight had instead moved to e5.
But I also wasn't in the stress of the moment too. I always get blinders during the game.
just curious instead of moving your queen to b2 to be safe when knight attacked did you consider going queen takes pawn oon f3 safe move for queen stops knight from checking and then move rook to d file to pressure pawn
I saw that, just commented same. I wondered why he didn't take either pawn "hanging". The one I would have taken was that one, and that would have defended how he lost this game. However, since the opponent was cheating, he probably would have found another way to "win".
First suspecting thing is the rook exchange... This is a good computer move.
Yes, that is very un-human to just let a rook go hanging to a bishop like that. Very few humans below GM level would just let that rook go like that when there is no immediate threat. That was a very deep sacrifice.
@@bct2000a no only weak computers don't give exchange but if you look his preivous games he is cheating
I played someone he was playing bad at first, dropped a queen and a rook, then after about a two minute pause started playing real fast and beat me. I reported it, a month later got my points back, they caught the guy cheating.
What happens on turn 20 if you play queen F4 instead?
eric: i like the fact that he’s thinking
stockfish: yeah lemme get to the depth 30
Came here for levy’s new video
The individual moves near the end were definitely possible to spot as a human, even for lower-rated players. However, it is the sequence of moves that led to that perfect positioning that are immediately suspicious. When you analyze engine-played games as a whole, you can start to see the patterns and perfect chain of moves that should be impossible for most humans to calculate in such a short amount of time. Those oddball moves that do not make sense until way later in the game are dead giveaways.
I find it impressive that you are so upbeat despite losing a game like that.
He's such a class act. I'm impressed.
Hey Eric I love your content! I think I got the perfect merch suggestion for you....put the words "Queen d5!!" on the front (But use an actual picture of a queen with the move d5!!) and on the back have the words, "Oh my gosh!! Are you serious?" or "if this works, this guy is a genius!" Or "That's ridiculous!"
Your voice is so calming. Your videos will definitely be added to my lullaby collection which also houses Jerry Chessnetwork.
Btw, due to cheating concerns, if we can’t hear your ideas then some purpose of these videos is rendered moot. What to do?
7:58 any merit to Bc5 instead to threaten the discovery?
The only thing I was wondering was why you did not move your rook out when you had your King off the bottom file. However, I'm guessing the computer would then come up with another crazy move. Fun video!
The emote ideas were great too! We also need some sort of flag emote
You'd think a cheater would look at Qd5, and say "Hmmm....that move looks really sus. I shouldn't play that or they'll know I'm cheating." But instead the guy blitzes it out in two seconds.
if he took 10 seconds its not that suspicious . because its kinda obvious for decent players , but he blitzes it in 2 seconds which is an idiot thing to do
Well he spent several minutes on Ng5+ so a strong player would have calculated the follow up after Kg8.
@@randombanana640 yep, the reason Ng5+ works is that there's Qd5 there too so you would make the Qd5 move instantly
You played osm, i can't see you sad, u r my fav player
I am telling the truth. I am only 1900 player but I saw both moves Ng5 and Qd5 while I was watching this game for the first time. I am amazed why Eric could not even consider it . Close your eyes and after ten seconds open them up and look at the position. It is clearly calling for Ng5. Even if you don’t see the rest of the game you must at least consider it. That’s the key word.”consider”.
I like the way SupremeMonk pretended to have a long think before playing Ng5.
he is Mikhail Tal himself
Or perhaps Tal Baron? ;)
jqbtube you are actually right
A... Stockfish?
+jqbtube
Tal would crush you into ashes
@jqbtube true, but try finding the refutation over the board in any time constraint.
That moment when he gave rook for a bishop was also very puzzling and weird imo
Yea. Humans never do exchange sacs!
Not weird really. The focus was on attacking the weak king...pieces don't matter when you have checkmate!
@@majorcatastrophe2829 Still, aquiring the guts to sac the exchange like that isn't particulaty human. Perhaps in a classical game players the likes of Carlsen would be able to calculate all of it but mate wasn't at all clear at that point
@@oxey_ It was not really about mate, it was about not letting Black castle.
When do you stream on twitch? Would love to watch live
19:09 b5 results in knight takes on b5 pawn takes on b5 and queen takes on b5 with a double attack on the now pinned knight on c6
It’s funny to see that the complete comment section turns into super GM‘s. „It’s not that hard to find. The position screams for Ng5 and Qd5 is the natural continuation move!“
Yeah sure guys. Go back to your boring 1500-1800 Elo games and stop spitting so big words.
There is an IM that wasn’t able to find it. 2400 rated. He didn’t see it. So nope you wouldn’t have seen it ether!
It's not even the dunning kruger effect. The title says ridiculous queen sac and so everyone's looking for it and they find it. And think they could've done it without the hint either. Also, like half the puzzles on internet involve queen sac followed by forced checkmate type of solutions.
Yikes...
Okay, I am around 1800 ELO and I didn't spot it, I admit. Despite the hint and solving tactics for years. I though he was going to leave the queen hanging on c4 and do some other shit.. I definately saw Ng5+ (seen the pattern before) so that's not super high level, but the Qd5 move was a blindspot. To zic-zac it to c6 via d5 and then to checkmate on e8. Kind of clever eh?
hey now. I'm 1258 i'll have you know
ey man, how do you im 1500-1800? I could be 800 for all you know.
Not sure how it could've been done, but it's super painful to see the light squared bishop and both rooks on their original squares. You're basically playing with the queen and c6 knight (which has no moves). The moral for me is: concentrate on the development race. That queen sac c4 to d5. She didn't have any un-attacked squares to move to, did she?
What made this so spooky is how the variation is named after Nezthmedinov
Can someone explain why 20. Qb2 and not just take white queen on c4 with the pawn on b5
24:09 why QB2 and not QxA2?
Prevents the knight from moving to d4, keeping him up in the exchange. Arguably worth more than the pawn.
suprememonk? supreme PUNK! gets the dunk on his head with the ban xD
SupremeMonk, remember the sage words of Grasshopper - "A worker is known by his tools…. a shovel for a man who digs…. an axe for a woodsman..... Stockfish for a patzer" - Caine
I fairly new to chess and not the best so someone correct me if I’m wrong but wouldn’t (Pg7) be a great move after the Queen sac giving your king a place to escape and not be mated
I do not understand you, did you mean g5?
The risk of not castling....
Is this the next instalment of Stockfish is good at chess? Always a fan favourite
Would bishop to d7 allow pawn to b5 at 21:43? I just want to see if that would work.
13:10 here I'm left questioning. Yeah the artificial castle is a plan but I do not like the look of that hanging diagonal with the bishop on it. At this stage QB2 or BQ2 looks ridiculously better. But castling queenside is going to be a pin disaster. King's probably gonna be stuck in the center, but you can trade down the pieces and eventually activate your rooks.
Really nice game though, cheater or not it gave us an amazing game to watch.
why do you classify this as a queen sac even though it's clearly mate in 2 if you take?
I'm pretty sure that a queen sac for mate is still a queen sac
ok thanks I'm not an expert
Part of the reason I stopped playing online chess many years ago was because of cheaters. And it’s still going on today perhaps more so than ever. People are vile.
Sometimes, i also could see the sacrifice. It is like, you suddenly could grasp the whole board
But i agree if there are certain anamoly of this guy's games you could check his game history
Any decent chess player sees that this whole plan from the exchange sac to this deadly attack played so quickly feels completely inhuman. This is pretty ironic: by claiming that Qd5 was obvious or that black played badly you're actually showing your misunderstanding of chess, not how smart you are.
Jason Smith fuck off commie
Rack Jussian no but I also would have played QD5, it was a perfect set up. I would have done that with some serious thought tho, not instantaneous.
That's why I play speed chess. No cheating
@NR72X not really, there are few cheaters
just google "chess bot"
Not sure if I'm missing something, but at 11:08 isn't Qa5 very strong? Seems to open up a lot more opportunity for black
@22:00 would there have been any advantage to playing pawn to G5?
37:36 finally makes the move
Guys pls stop posting comments roasting SupermemeMonk I cant like them all.
Where do you brodcast your livestreams and do you have a schedule
This video confirms the importance of castling.
278 thumbs down ?! tell me ai s dont have feelings
wow eric got resilience and nerve
Everyone is playing shit against engines, that noting new.
Ng5+ I spotted almost immediately after Qb2, and I intuitively could tell it was white's best move, but I definitely couldn't tell that it was winning and didn't see that Qd5 follow-up.
Both were easy to see by a 2000 elo player....
I wonder why at 22:35 he did not take either pawn, the knight blocked the rook, so he could have taken the pawn on f4 and then the only "discovered" checks if the knight moved (exposing the rook to his queen) the queen could have just taken the knight.
100% he was using an engine
It is not a ridiculous sac when it's mate a move later. A ridiculous sac is when it takes effect 10 moves later and that is what is brilliant about it. I mean those of Tal or Nezhmedinov
To be fair that Queen "sac" was a pretty obvious move as it has 2 mating threats and its not like you are in a bullet game, so he had time to think about it.
instead of Qd2, what if you played Qf4, taking his pawn and preventing the knight from checking you?
loses the queen to Bg6+ instead (hxg6--Qxf4)