Black can make a 2000 centipawn blunder move 2, but that method gives the same centipawn loss of 1970,1980.
en.lichess.org/ClYZUfDg#4
en.lichess.org/ClYZUfDg#4
Here’s my attempt, using Rise’s 2... Qg5!! technique. I made sure that starting from move 5, the entire game oscillates between #1 and #−1, and ended it at exactly 100th move to avoid dividing by too much when averaging. Still 1970/1980, this appears to be the max, not even helped by the fact Stockfish now considers 1. g4 to be a mistake (which wasn’t the case for Rise’s game).
Also my final position is prettier than all of yours :−P
en.lichess.org/gRL5liCv#200
Also my final position is prettier than all of yours :−P
en.lichess.org/gRL5liCv#200
In antichess it’s much easier :-)
en.lichess.org/yM9XFgJr#4
Though the game-losing 1. e4 apparently only contributes 1k cp, so more moves are necessary. Stockfish must have missed the memo that the score for the initial position is something like #50 rather than +1.1 :-)
(The longest path in the recent proof that 1. e3 wins is this: en.lichess.org/xAL228IE — though it can be shortened by quite some amount.)
en.lichess.org/yM9XFgJr#4
Though the game-losing 1. e4 apparently only contributes 1k cp, so more moves are necessary. Stockfish must have missed the memo that the score for the initial position is something like #50 rather than +1.1 :-)
(The longest path in the recent proof that 1. e3 wins is this: en.lichess.org/xAL228IE — though it can be shortened by quite some amount.)
I've set the record: 1971 and 1981. Using Rise's technique but with opposite colors. The main difference is that 1...f5 in my game is worse than Rise's 1.g4
en.lichess.org/3jRQ41Th#4
en.lichess.org/3jRQ41Th#4
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.