Wow this is amazing :) The idea is you want one side to have mate in 1, miss the mate, and then have the opponent blunder it again, but jposthuma wins because both sides have the mate in 1, so the centipawn loss per move is even larger.
close enough!
the centipawn evaluation boundaries are capped at -10/+10 (so you can only lose 2000 centipawn a move). you don't need to go for the fastest mutual checkmate possibility, as long as the eval swings beyond -10/+10.
he wins because he optimized move 1 better.
i thought 1 g4 e6 2 f4 Qg5 was the worst first move that could lead to a fast +10 eval swing, but he managed to find a better move 1 by creatively not going for some fool's mate and "only" giving the queen instead. on move 2 we are tied, but on move 1 since e4 f5? is a bigger mistake than g4?! e6, he wins :p
the centipawn evaluation boundaries are capped at -10/+10 (so you can only lose 2000 centipawn a move). you don't need to go for the fastest mutual checkmate possibility, as long as the eval swings beyond -10/+10.
he wins because he optimized move 1 better.
i thought 1 g4 e6 2 f4 Qg5 was the worst first move that could lead to a fast +10 eval swing, but he managed to find a better move 1 by creatively not going for some fool's mate and "only" giving the queen instead. on move 2 we are tied, but on move 1 since e4 f5? is a bigger mistake than g4?! e6, he wins :p
It approaches 2000. There were trials how close you can get say about 1950 or 1960 as far as can I remember. You need some cunning 1-2 moves.
Edit: even a bit more lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/what-is-the-centi-pawn-loss-cap-lets-see?page=2#17
Edit: even a bit more lichess.org/forum/game-analysis/what-is-the-centi-pawn-loss-cap-lets-see?page=2#17
Is this a game you played against yourself?
yeah xD
198.7 for white
263.2 for black
263.2 for black
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.