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

World Computer Chess Championship Tournament

Junior (Computer)6/8(+4 -0 =4)[games]
Shredder (Computer)5.5/8(+3 -0 =5)[games]
HIARCS (Computer)5.5/8(+3 -0 =5)[games]
Jonny (Computer)5/8(+3 -1 =4)[games]
Pandix (Computer)5/8(+3 -1 =4)[games]
The Baron (Computer)4.5/8(+3 -2 =3)[games]
booot (Computer)3/8(+2 -4 =2)[games]
Rookie (Computer)1.5/8(+1 -6 =1)[games]
Woodpusher (Computer)0/8(+0 -8 =0)[games] Chess Event Description
World Computer Chess Championship (2011)

ICGA website:

 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36  PGN Download
Game  ResultMoves YearEvent/LocaleOpening
1. Pandix vs Rookie 1-0712011World Computer Chess ChampionshipA29 English, Four Knights, Kingside Fianchetto
2. HIARCS vs booot 1-0532011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD17 Queen's Gambit Declined Slav
3. Woodpusher vs The Baron 0-1432011World Computer Chess ChampionshipE20 Nimzo-Indian
4. booot vs Shredder 0-11032011World Computer Chess ChampionshipE62 King's Indian, Fianchetto
5. The Baron vs HIARCS  ½-½882011World Computer Chess ChampionshipB90 Sicilian, Najdorf
6. Jonny vs Pandix  0-1422011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD58 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tartakower (Makagonov-Bondarevsky) Syst
7. Rookie vs Woodpusher 1-0552011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC45 Scotch Game
8. Junior vs Jonny ½-½552011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC18 French, Winawer
9. Shredder vs Pandix  ½-½462011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD35 Queen's Gambit Declined
10. booot vs Junior 0-1362011World Computer Chess ChampionshipA15 English
11. Woodpusher vs Shredder  0-1382011World Computer Chess ChampionshipE91 King's Indian
12. Jonny vs Rookie 1-0582011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD32 Queen's Gambit Declined, Tarrasch
13. Junior vs The Baron 1-0412011World Computer Chess ChampionshipB08 Pirc, Classical
14. Pandix vs booot  ½-½722011World Computer Chess ChampionshipA13 English
15. HIARCS vs Woodpusher 1-0332011World Computer Chess ChampionshipA01 Nimzovich-Larsen Attack
16. The Baron vs Jonny  ½-½512011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC10 French
17. The Baron vs Pandix 1-0112011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC54 Giuoco Piano
18. Rookie vs Junior 0-1382011World Computer Chess ChampionshipB83 Sicilian
19. booot vs Woodpusher  1-0452011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC11 French
20. Pandix vs HIARCS ½-½1202011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC95 Ruy Lopez, Closed, Breyer
21. Junior vs Shredder ½-½942011World Computer Chess ChampionshipB43 Sicilian, Kan, 5.Nc3
22. Shredder vs HIARCS  ½-½432011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD45 Queen's Gambit Declined Semi-Slav
23. Jonny vs booot 1-0692011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD35 Queen's Gambit Declined
24. Rookie vs The Baron 0-11102011World Computer Chess ChampionshipC91 Ruy Lopez, Closed
25. Shredder vs Jonny  ½-½572011World Computer Chess ChampionshipD30 Queen's Gambit Declined
 page 1 of 2; games 1-25 of 36  PGN Download
  REFINE SEARCH:   White wins (1-0) | Black wins (0-1) | Draws (1/2-1/2)  

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Jan-07-12  King Death: <twinlark> I'll bet he's checking out his options.
Jan-08-12  The Rocket: <twinlark:> the main problem with the rybka team response is that they complain about the rule rather than the verdict.. if they in anyway found it nonsensical they did not need to participate.. a rule can't be good enough unless it affects you and then suddenly they are outraged.... so its pretty silly
Jan-08-12  mrbasso: CB is biased, they sell Rybka after all.
Jan-08-12  AlphaMale: Not wishing to travail through all four parts of <Gross Miscarriage of Justice>, does Soren Riis identify who was responsible for writing the ICGA's report with its falsified/manipulated/misleading/misattributed code?
Premium Chessgames Member
  heuristic: the chessbase report is very good.

i found some of the terminology inconsistent (templates vs header files); OTOH the supporting URLs contain hard data to support the writing.

i found rajilich's comments to be technically correct and his situation w.r.t. source code management to be hilarous!

it names a trio of folks, one who is quite active in the newsgroup. their comments are less technical.

Premium Chessgames Member
  alexmagnus: Riis is not unbiased though. He is (or was?) a moderator in the official Rybka forum, and also he was in the Rybka team in all that world champs. But we'll see...
Jan-08-12  Tomlinsky: I don't think that the CB article washes personally. The initialisation routines alone are in many places a direct copy, not just an implementation or inerpretation of an algorythm, repeating the exact same order of setup. That isn't a coincidence. Lifting ideas and interpreting them to suit your own code is one thing, taking someone else's source code and basically pressing the compile button is another.
Jan-08-12  AlphaMale: <The initialisation routines alone are in many places a direct copy, not just an implementation or inerpretation of an algorythm, repeating the exact same order of setup.>

So what else is a direct copy?

Premium Chessgames Member
  gezafan: What would these programs be rated? How do they compare with top human players?
Jan-09-12  Kinghunt: The stronger programs competing here would be rated about 3000. It's difficult to assign them a meaningful human rating though.
Jan-09-12  twinlark: <Tomlinsky>

You posted earlier that:

<I don't think that the CB article washes personally. The initialisation routines alone are in many places a direct copy, not just an implementation or inerpretation of an algorythm, repeating the exact same order of setup.>

I don't know much about the technical issues involved but Riis seems to have addressed that point quite directly:

<Given the points Iíve outlined above what are we to make of the following categorical statements made by Zach Wegner in his ICGA report findings?

< ...[snip]


Because of Fruit's unique PST initialization code, the origin of Rybka's PSTs in Fruit is clear.>

These are all demonstrably incorrect and tendentious conclusions...> (about half way down Part 3 of the article)

Jan-10-12  Tomlinsky: <TL: I don't know much about the technical issues involved but Riis seems to have addressed that point quite directly>

Riis hasn't addressed that point at all apart from offering an opinion and attempting to obfuscate, as far as I can see, what is pretty much crystal clear when looking at the presented evidence of retrograde reassembled object code. In my opinion. :)

The initialisation routines and structures given as examples of direct copying, as opposed to an implementation of the same or similar 'idea(s)', are in many places in exactly the same order as each other. Even if they are initialised with different, tweaked, variables and constants this is quite obviously not a coincidence and enough on its own for the rules to have been broken.

I'm purposely sticking with one issue raised as evidence as there really is no need to argue the toss on other points with regard ethics/copyright/etc. This alone is a rule breaker and enough to claim infraction.

Chessbase and Rajlich are, in my opinion, being very disingenuous in the way they are handling this by letting a 'third party' offer opinion and insight while doing absolutely nothing to address, or be seen to address, the issue directly.

Jan-11-12  twinlark: Fair enough. There's more discussion at Rybka (Computer).
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: For those who follow computer chess closely, would the weakest program here, Woodpusher, still have a higher estimated ELO than world champion Anand?
Jan-11-12  chessexp: NO WAY. Woodpusher is < 2000.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: If Woody is so weak, then why was it invited to such an elite event?
Jan-11-12  chessexp: Anybody with an original (ie. Not Rybka) chess engine can participate. It's not really a world championship in the sense that only the strongest 3000+ can join for the fun.
Jan-11-12  nimh: Woodpusher is not found on any engine rating lists, as far as I can see. How can one say with confidence it's below 2000 without even specifying hardware?
Jan-11-12  chessexp: Woodpusher is an old private engine, I noticed its estimated rating a long time ago from somewhere I can't remember. It's not a new program.
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <HeMateMe> I wouldn't consider this an elite event. The following engines did not participate: Houdini, Rybka, Critter, Stockfish, Komodo, Naum, and Spike. All these engines have consistently been rated higher than the highest-entered engine entered in this event, Shredder, in the CCRL 40/40 tournaments. That is the equivalent of holding a World Championship tournament where Carlsen, Aronian, Kramnik, Anand, Radjabov, Topalov, and Karjakin did not participate. Oh, the organizers can CLAIM that this is the "World Computer Chess Championship Tournament" but in my opinion that is a meaningless claim.
Premium Chessgames Member
  HeMateMe: Thats a good point. I didn't realize that so many heavy hitters were not at this event. I wonder why there isn't one really strong event where all the software handlers feel they MUST attend, so that we can have a truly "world computer championship"? A little financial reward would probably help things along.
Jan-11-12  Marmot PFL: <I wouldn't consider this an elite event. The following engines did not participate: Houdini, Rybka, Critter, Stockfish, Komodo, Naum, and Spike.>

Maybe they copy each other so much that they could all risk being disqualified.

Jan-11-12  chessexp: <HeMateMe> Nobody wants to finance it. FIDE doesn't care, Chessbase just wants Rybka to win the ICGA etc.
Jan-11-12  Tomlinsky: <TL> Thanks and Happy New Year.
Premium Chessgames Member
  AylerKupp: <Marmot PFL> LOL! Yes, chess engine development can certainly be an incestuous enterprise!
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 10)
search thread:   
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 10 OF 10 ·  Later Kibitzing>

NOTE: Create an account today to post replies and access other powerful features which are available only to registered users. Becoming a member is free, anonymous, and takes less than 1 minute! If you already have a username, then simply login login under your username now to join the discussion.

Please observe our posting guidelines:

  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, duplicate, or gibberish posts.
  3. No vitriolic or systematic personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. No cyberstalking or malicious posting of negative or private information (doxing/doxxing) of members.
  6. No trolling.
  7. The use of "sock puppet" accounts to circumvent disciplinary action taken by moderators, create a false impression of consensus or support, or stage conversations, is prohibited.

Please try to maintain a semblance of civility at all times.

Blow the Whistle

See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform a moderator.

NOTE: Please keep all discussion on-topic. This forum is for this specific tournament only. To discuss chess or this site in general, visit the Kibitzer's Café.

Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.
All moderator actions taken are ultimately at the sole discretion of the administration.

Spot an error? Please suggest your correction and help us eliminate database mistakes!

Copyright 2001-2020, Chessgames Services LLC