Stockfish evaluation at depth 50 on all possible initial opening moves

Yup. 1. d4 wins almost 100% of the time!!!

That is all interesting, but it hardly helps humans play.  Knowing that Stockfish recommends 1. Nf3 doesn't tell you much about how to proceed in trillions possible variations, and memorizing those variations is simply impossible for a human at our current stage of evolution.

Very interesting thread! (To me, at least.) Somehow I missed this thread when it first appeared.

Database dump

Of course Stockfish vs. Stockfish is 95% draws...it's an engine playing itself.  Both sides evaluate the positions almost identically, and when developing, I can guarantee you that if the results are not mostly draws, the team will tweak the engine until it is playing mostly draws, because winning championships is about not losing first, winning second.  You can draw 50 games for every win and still be champ.  So tuning an engine to play like Tal is counter productive, because aggressive chess that wins via applying lots of pressure and forcing an error doesn't do diddly to a an engine.

Hard to read what their site is talking about through the Google translation. Something about a DB of 4 million positions wrapped in some of their proprietary nonsense. If you want a free position DB without all the hubub, Lichess has 28 million analyzed games for download, from which you could probably scrape tens of millions of analyzed positions.

So according to this 1. f4 is better than 1. Nc3 ?

Somehow I'm not convinced...

WOW!

Ok, Nf3 gives +0.17 advantage, chess has been solved! 😒😒😒

Latest stockfish still see 1. Nf3 as best move (according to analysis.sesse website).

Latest Stockfish has contempt 40, so +0.62 means= +0.22. 

best move is 1.c4 according to Alpha Zero and let's face it..... He's the God of the Modem Chess World

Alpha Zero is estimated as 3774 rating only. Latest Stockfish on 64 CPU is 3851+ rating.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZAIuHR6n-5JTxKQc0XUSx1jyUrgVEcj8DNLKA7-urBw/edit?ts=5b7d9014#gid=763519729

For what it's worth, here's a wiki that's devoted to this sort of thing:

http://oeco.hopto.org/mediawiki/index.php/Main_Page

http://oeco.hopto.org/mediawiki/index.php/Initial_Position

http://oeco.hopto.org/mediawiki/index.php/ECO_Classification_Code_Index

Your reference never reach depth 50, i see about 17 to 25 only (which is extremely shallow and unreliably weak ) . As you might know, the strength of computer analysis is highly dependent on depth or number of nodes search.

I expect depth 50 analysis of Stockfish is probably (3700 elo) and depth 17 analysis is probably (2700 elo.).About 1000 elo strength gap.

https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/perfect2018books

You can download, perfectchess 2018, computer analyses opening book.( second best opening book among computer chess)

The best book is cerebellum but a little bit complicated to use. ( I have a thread that explain how to install it)

https://www.chess.com/blog/drmrboss/how-to-install-brainfish-the-best-chess-program-in-the-world

Here it is. ( Keep in mind , Stockfish evalues between +0.5 to -0.5 in opening are generally perfectly playable.

Why is 1. Nf3 considered the best move?

This is the static evaluation table of static position. Put any pgn or Fen into that search box and stockfish will evaluate static.

Why best? Cos SF consider the end of PV better than other moves.

https://hxim.github.io/Stockfish-Evaluation-Guide/

So I got this position as the final FEN of SF evaluation of initial position of 1. Nf3 (at depth 52)

And the pgn is 50/80   200:44:26   9.890.822.131k   18.586k   +0,17   1.Nf3 d5 2.g3 c6 3.c4 g6 4.cxd5 cxd5 5.d4 Bg7 6.Bg2 e6 7.0-0 Ne7 8.b3 0-0 9.Qd2 Nbc6 10.Ba3 Qd7 11.Rc1 b6 12.e3 Bb7 13.Nc3 Rfc8 14.Rc2 Nf5 15.Rac1 h5 16.Bh3 a5 17.Na4 Qd8 18.Bxf5 exf5 19.h3 Bf6 20.Kg2 Bg7 21.h4 Bf6 22.Rc3 Ne7 23.Rxc8 Nxc8 24.Nc3 Nd6 25.Bxd6 Qxd6 26.Nb5 Qd7