chessgames.com
Members · Prefs · Laboratory · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing

(If you register a free account you won't see all these ads!)
Houdini (Computer) vs Rybka (Computer)
TCEC Houdini - Rybka Match (2011), http://www.tcec-chess.org, rd 37, Feb-06
Formation: Queen Pawn Game: London System (D02)  ·  1-0
ANALYSIS [x]

FEN COPIED

Click Here to play Guess-the-Move
Given 2 times; par: 83 [what's this?]

explore this opening
find similar games 11 more Houdini/Rybka games
PGN: download | view | print Help: general | java-troubleshooting

TIP: You can make these tips go away by registering a free account then visiting your preferences page. Simply check the option "Don't show random tips on game pages." and click the Update Profile button at the bottom.

PGN Viewer:  What is this?
For help with this chess viewer, please see the Olga Chess Viewer Quickstart Guide.
PREMIUM MEMBERS CAN REQUEST COMPUTER ANALYSIS [more info]

Kibitzer's Corner
Mar-27-13  GHOST19: That is some deep game !
I like the 17.Rab1 Nc2-a1-b3-c5 manoeuver for a speculative pawn sacrifice.
Aug-09-13  Kwesi: 20. Na1!!?
Oct-22-13  The Rocket: F5?! is the start of blacks downturn. It hems in the lightsquared bishop, as well weakening both the d5 and e6 square, which Houdini later exploits. Rybka 3 f5 as a suboptimal move, but this R4 version thinks differently. Houdini plays the game masterfully from there on end. Two great pawn sacs.
Oct-22-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: Houdini either loses or sacrifices a pawn (depending on your perspective) with 21.Nb3 and obtains a bind on the dark squares. Up until the time of Rybka's resignation on move 54, 43 moves later, Houdini remained with a 1-pawn deficit. Does anyone still claim that engines are incapable of positional sacrifices or do they think that Houdini was capable of calculating 86-plies deep in a timed game?
Oct-22-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  tamar: The famous match between these two engines started me thinking what effect these amazing middlegames will have on staid openings.

At the time, Houdini appeared like a freakish anomaly, producing this game, and the astounding pawn sacrifices in Rybka vs Houdini, 2011 0-1

Now it seems other engines have caught up, and Komodo and even occasionally Hiarcs will play otherworldly concepts.

Who will benefit? Probably not Carlsen, who has an aversion to deep study of computer play. But he will have to watch out, because his opponents will take note, and incorporate these matches into their opening choices.

Oct-23-13  The Rocket: Pawn sacrifices from compuerts were prevelant long before the Rybka/Houdini ascension.
Oct-23-13  The Rocket: Pawn sacrifices from computers were prevelant long before the Rybka/Houdini ascension.
Oct-23-13
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: I did not mean to imply that pawn sacrifices from computers were non-existent or even rare until recently. Far from it. But there are pawn sacrifices and there are pawn sacrifices.

The first type of pawn sacrifice, which I will call tactical, happens when the computer can calculate within its search horizon that the pawn will be recovered with interest (more material, overwhelming position, etc.). I will assume that this happens most often when a strong engine plays a weak engine which cannot properly calculate the consequences of accepting the pawn or, ahem, when the computer plays a patzer like myself.

But this sacrifice was different. Houdini could not calculate when it played 20.Na1 that it could recover the lost pawn or reach an overwhelming position within its search horizon. Indeed, I can only think of two possibilities:

1. Houdini missed when it played 20.Na1 that it would lose a pawn. Since that would have been apparent in only a 4-ply search and in a game at classical time controls Houdini can achieve search depths in the order of 20 ply. I find this doubtful.

2. Houdini determined that after 21...Qxa2 22.Nc5 Nxc5 23.dxc5 Qa5 24.b4 that it would have an advantageous position, in spite of its pawn minus and doubled c-pawns. This I find impressive. So I can only conclude that this was a positional sacrifice on Houdini's part and that it (correctly) calculated the resulting position to be to its advantage and Rybka did not.

Pawn sacrifices of this type are still unusual for engines. It would be very interesting (for those of us who find these kinds of things interesting) to be able to look at the game logs and see how Houdini and Rybka evaluated the position around the 25th move.

Here is another example (I was the computer operator for Rybka), perhaps equally interesting: Aylerkupp / Rybka vs Kutztown46 / Stockfish, 2011. In this position Stockfish effectively sacrificed a pawn by 10...h5 and evaluated the position at that point at [+0.60], and at [0.00] when Rybka actually won the pawn after 12.Bxh5.


click for larger view

In contrast, Rybka evaluated the position at [+0.40] after 10.Ne1 (prior to Stockfish offering the pawn) and at [+0.39] after winning the pawn with 12.Bxh5. So, while Stockfish found the offer of the pawn advantageous if accepted, Rybka considered it pretty much equal to other alternatives. BTW, the game ended in a draw but not without some drama.

So, for those who still think that engines cannot play positionally and make positional sacrifices, here is some evidence that they can. It may be rare but, then again, aren't these types of positional pawn sacrifices rare in human games also?

Oct-23-13  The Rocket: The pawn sacrifice is brilliant, but engines do take into account positional factors as well, going back to the old chessmaster(the king) engines world champion personalitys from the late 90s. Check them out for yoursef.
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No posting personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.


NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific game and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of Chessgames.com, its employees, or sponsors.
Spot an error? Please submit a correction slip and help us eliminate database mistakes!
This game is type: CLASSICAL (Disagree? Please submit a correction slip.)

Featured in the Following Game Collections [what is this?]
100 best of the best Chess Games
by tallike
98_A46+A48+D02 ... L O N D O N SYSTEM !!!
by whiteshark
98_A46+A48+D02 ... L O N D O N SYSTEM !!!
by yiotta


home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | Notable Games | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | contact us
Copyright 2001-2018, Chessgames Services LLC