No, he's talking about "conventionally calibrated Stockfish":
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rei Ayanami
A 1600 human with enough time (i.e., not something super fast), and taking it seriously, will beat conventionally calibrated Stockfish every time, spotted a piece in the opening position. Full-strength Stockfish is a lot stronger than 2800 (in the sense of a lot stronger than a 2800 human, since computer ratings can't be directly compared). Although I can't see that difference mattering much in this particular case.
Either way, if Rei's hypothesis is true, does it make a difference? I'm already
highly skeptical I could beat Magnus Carlsen with piece odds. I don't think I'd have better chances against, say, Sam Shankland. But if he's correct that piece odds are good enough for a guy like me to beat a - for all intents and purposes - invincible chess-entity, then I don't think it matters much. Might as well play Alpha Zero powered by a Google cluster then.
Again, I don't think he's right, and we'll see in due time (on my computer, not some TCEC machine of course, but that should be good enough to whoop my 1600 ass).