|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Aug-28-04 | | Lawrence: How strange ;-) that Chessbase hasn't been making any noise about the final result of the Shredder-Hydra match. |
|
| Aug-29-04 | | ruylopez900: <Lawrence>
Here is the last article summing up the Shredder-Hydra Match. http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail... |
|
| Oct-24-04 | | fgh: I can mantain 0.30 advantage against Shredder 8 30 moves, but no more. |
|
| Oct-24-04 | | clocked: <fgh> then you didn't have a 0.3 advantage did you? |
|
| Jan-18-05 | | Hanada: Hey, I have an idea......just invite Eduard Nemeth to play all those programs by himself. He shouldn't have a problem. Eduard Nemeth
http://www.xs4all.nl/~timkr/chess2/... |
|
| Feb-11-05 | | csmath: Shredder 9 has been released but there are bugs in it. The most irritating one that Meyer-Kahlen has not repaired from the previous version is that every now and then in the infinite analisys the program crashes. It is not possible to analize any longer game that way.
C'mon man, repair that! |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | Jaymthegenius: Anyone hear about Deep Shredder 9? I have ordered it! I wonder if the multi processor version can defeat Hydra? I vote Hydra as the best chess player in history, no human can defeat it! |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | csmath: Appples and oranges. Hydra uses cluster computing, you cannot beat that with a multiprocessor PC, you have to beat it with another cluster. This is no equal opponent, Hydra is ultimate computing, not a PC. Shredder is the best PC has to offer.
I just played 36 standard games with Shredder 9, this is a great engine. My score: +31 -1 =2. Here is my win in Naydorf against an opponent that used Deep Shredder 9, rated standard 2779 at the time I was playing him. Standard 30-30. 1. e4 c5
2. Nf3 d6
3. d4 cxd4
4. Nxd4 Nf6
5. Nc3 a6
6. Be2 e5
7. Nb3 Be7
8. O-O O-O
9. Qd3 Nc6
10. Nd5 Nxd5
11. exd5 Na5
12. Nd2 b5
13. b4 Nb7
14. c4 Bd7
15. Bb2 Qb6
16. Qg3 a5
17. c5 dxc5
18. Bxe5 Qg6
19. bxc5 Qxg3
20. Bxg3 Bxc5
21. Rac1 Rfe8
22. Bd3 Rac8
23. Nf3 Bd6
24. Bxd6 Nxd6
25. Nd4 Nc4
26. a4 Nb6
27. axb5 Nxd5
28. Rxc8 Bxc8
29. f3 a4
30. Rc1 Kf8
31. Be4 Nb6
32. Rc6 Na8
33. b6 Ba6
34. Rd6 a3
35. Bd5 g6
36. Rf6 Re7
37. Nc2 Rd7
38. Bxa8 a2
39. Rf4 Rd1+
40. Kf2 Rd2+
41. Kg3 Rxc2
42. Ra4 Bc4
43. Ra7 Rb2
44. b7 Ke8
45. Kf4 Kd8
46. Ra4 Be6
47. Ke5 Kc7
48. b8=Q+ Kxb8
49. Bd5 Rb5
50. Rxa2 Bxd5
51. Rf2 Bxf3+
52. Kf6 Bd5
53. Kg7 h5
54. Rc2 Kb7
55. Kf8 Kb6
56. Kg7 Rc5
57. Rd2 Kc6
58. Re2 Kd6
59. Kh6 Rc4
60. Kg5 Rg4+
61. Kf6 Rxg2
62. Re8 Rf2+
63. Kg5 Rxh2
64. Kf4 h4
65. Rd8+ Kc5
66. Rc8+ Kd4
67. Rc1 Rd2
68. Kg4 Be6+
69. Kg5 h3
70. Rf1 h2
71. Rh1 Bd5
72. Rxh2 Rxh2
White forfeits on time (totally lost anyway)
0-1 |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | csmath: I think it was a huge error for Meyer-Kahlen accepting a match against Hydra on so much superior hardware Hydra used. Some of us who know what was the difference would never allow that to happen. This way it looks that Hydra is a better engine which is simply not the case since the difference in hardware was too much to handle. If you want to measure up engines you need to do that on equal or at least a comparable hardware. |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | Minor Piece Activity: Maybe, maybe not. Fritz and Hydra scored the same number of points in Bilbao but Fritz had vastly inferior hardware (a 1.7 gigahertz laptop) whereas Hydra had a cluster of 16 processors. |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | csmath: This is playing a small number of games against humans. That does not count as a serious statistical measure for chess engines. On the same hardware Fritz is weaker than Shredder. |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | shortsight: <Fritz is weaker than Shredder>
is it a promotion or fact? i think you have Shredder 9, that's why you claim it's the best. |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | csmath: I think you are making a conclusion based on your own guesses. I have all of these programs except Hydra which is not publicly available.
I mentioned here Swedish Rating list that is based on tens of thousands of games between different engines. It ranks Shredder 8 #1 (that was before version 9 was released). That is what we are talking about. There were also world championships between these engines and Shredder has the best record of all of them though the current champ is Junior. I also have experiemental games between them on two computers with the same hardware using serial connection, I used that for hundreds of games and eventually settled for Shredder and Hiarcs based on my own results. But what do you know about that? Let me guess - nothing. |
|
| Feb-22-05 | | shortsight: yeah, right now, you are throwing a lot of so-called facts, but some of them are your own experiment, which could pose inaccuracies. and if i starts to refute your claims, i guess you'll change account, log in as willc21 to add more support to you. GM prepared differently against other GMs, and you should do the same to the programs. tweakings are necessary for each opponents. how far do you about tweaking junior or fritz or shredder? why each time the programs enter the world computer championships have different results than our own experiments back home? the operators know what they are doing, they know what to change/tweak when face with different programs. the fact is the swedish ratings take into account their test matches, so rating only shows they're definitely one of the top, but being in the top doesn't necessarily means absolute top. why not try using older programs ike fritz5 or shredder 6 with the same setup you have right now? try using the updated books, you might get interesting results, there will be games where shredder 6 better than shredder 9. why? because you are only using default mode. tweaking is the key, and apart from the programmer, no one else is better than the creators themselves. not even you, who only thrashtalk that you have this and that. if have so much, create a website, and put all your stuff and experiments online. and i don't guess. i see at a lot of other pages that you said you have shredder 9. and the theory that you are wiilc21. i see the relations too. |
|
| Feb-23-05 | | Jaymthegenius: I have switched deep shredder 9 to single processor version (Playing like Shredder 9) and Fritz 7 has defeated it (Mostly lost off of time, Shredder takes long to think, it was far ahead, then started making random moves, causing a loss) But on multi-proccessor, Deep Shredder wins (There is even an engine called Crafty! Like the guy here) Maybe I should log on as Deep Shredder 9, cut and paste analysis (this is how I assume Crafty post here anyways) to show Crafty that he, although is mostly accurate, just isnt the analysis bag of chips. |
|
| Feb-24-05 | | shortsight: Poeple use Crafty because it's free, it's open source program. |
|
| Feb-24-05 | | csmath: I used Crafty a lot and people did not believe me, it was that good. I think few of the guys even started noplaying me because they believed I had something else. Crafty is a good engine but not as good as Shredder or Hiarcs. In fact the only two positional engines around are Shredder and Hiarcs. There are some other engines that are pretty strong. Pro Deo or Tiger 2004 for example. Fritz is tactical but not very good at the positional game. Similar with Junior. There is a new engine Zappa that has been rather strong and won last CCT7. I played it and it was a very strong opponent though it has never beaten me (not yet). I think the author is very into developing it further.
For now I think Shredder and Hiarcs are the best. |
|
| Feb-24-05 | | csmath: This was a tournament for amateur engines just recently. http://cct7.crafty-chess.com/r9.html
This is a GM level of chess, I think many GMs would get beaten here badly. |
|
| Feb-24-05 | | child of my tears: <Jaymthegenius> Err, have you read "Crafty's" bio? |
|
| Feb-24-05 | | child of my tears: Better hope you're still in time to kill that one |
|
| Feb-25-05 | | Jaymthegenius: Also, here are some of my games vs. Deep Shredder 9, (I lost ALOT, but I am omiting those games) [Event ", Blitz:4'+2""]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2005.02.22"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Deep Shredder 9"]
[Black "Jay"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[Annotator "Deep Shredder 9 (30s)"]
[PlyCount "66"]
A00: Irregular Openings 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. Nc3 d5 3. e3 $146 (3. d3 Bg4 4. g3 Bxf3 5. exf3 Nbd7 6. Bg2 c6 7. O-O e6 8. f4 Bd6 9. Ne2 O-O 10. Nd4 c5 11. Nf3 e5 12.fxe5 Nxe5 13. d4 Nxf3+ 14. Bxf3 c4 15. Bg5 Be7 16. Re1 h6 17. Qe2 hxg5 Mestrovic,Z-♗rglez,♖/Ljubljana 1997/C♗M 61 ext/1-0 (53)) (3. g3 c6 4. Bg2 Bf5 5. O-O e6 6. b3 h6 7. Bb2 Be7 8. Ne5 Nbd7 9. Nxd7 Qxd7 10. d4 O-O 11. e3 b5 12.a4 a6 13. axb5 cxb5 1/2-1/2 Votava,J-Jirovsky,M/Zlin 1997/C♗M 61) (3. e4 dxe4 4. Ng5 Bf5 (4... e6 5. Bc4 Be7 6. Qe2 O-O 7. Ngxe4 c5 8. d3 Nc6 9. Be3 Nd4 10.Qd1 Nd5 11. O-O f5 12. Nd2 Nc6 13. Nf3 Kh8 14. Bd2 Bf6 15. Re1 a6 16. a3 Qd6
17. Ba2 Nc7 18. Bg5 Bxg5 19. Nxg5
Walda,M-♔asper,W/♗ad Wiessee 1997/C♗M 61 ext/1-0 (59)) 5. Bc4 e6 6. d3 exd3 7.Qf3 Nc6 8. Nxf7 Nd4 9. Nxd8 Nxf3+ 10. gxf3 Rxd8 11. cxd3 Kf7 12. Ne4 h6 13. Be3 b6 14. Ke2 c5 15. a4 a5 16. h4 Nd5 17. h5 Be7 ♔oshelev,V-♔ozhevnikov,E/♘ovosibirsk 2002/C♗M 89 ext/1/2-1/2) 3... Bg4 4. h3
Bxf3 5. Qxf3 e5 6. e4 d4 This push gains space 7. Nd5 Nxd5 8. exd5 Nd7 9. Bb5 a6 10. Ba4 b5 11. Bb3 Bd6 12. d3 Bb4+ 13. Kd1 (13. c3 $5 is an interesting idea dxc3 14. O-O $15) 13... O-O $17 14. Qg3 Qf6 15. Bg5 Qd6
16. a3 Ba5 17. Kc1 (17. f4 $5 $17) 17... Rae8 18. f4 (18. Kb1 f5 $17) 18... e4 19. dxe4 Rxe4 20. Rd1 Nc5 21. Ba2 Re2 22. Qf3 $2 (22. Rxd4 Qg6 23. Bb3 Re1+ 24.Rd1 $19) 22... Rfe8 23. b4 Qg6 (23... Na4 $142 $5 seems even better 24. Bb3 Bb6 25. Bxa4 bxa4 26. f5 $19 Jay: I disagree, look at my doubled a-pawns.
Material is even, and I am still much better, but the line I played in the
game is better.) 24. Rd2 Re1+ 25. Rd1 R1e2 26. Rd2 R2e3 (26... Re1+ $142 $5
keeps an even firmer grip 27. Rd1 R8e2 28. Bb3 Nxb3+ 29. Qxb3 Rxd1+ 30. Kxd1$19 Jay: the risk to trade off rooks seems too great in this line, and a queen trade doesnt look feasable within the next 10 moves, I dont like bishop or pure queen and pawn.endings.) 27. Qg4 Ne4 28. Rxd4 $4 the final mistake, not that it matters anymore (28. f5 Qxg5 29. Qxg5 Nxg5 30.bxa5 $17 Jay: Just why didnt Shredder play this in the game? if it can anylize, it can play, in this line I would be conserned with removing the
minor pieces, and capturing the doubled a-pawns.) 28... Bb6 29. Rd1 Nf2 30. f5 d6 31. Bf4 (31. Qf4 a last effort to resist the inevitable Nxd1 32. Qxd6 cxd6 33. Bxe3 Nxe3 34. g4 $19) 31... Qf6 32. Rb1 Nxg4 33. hxg4 Rxa3 (33... Rxa3 34. Bb3 Qc3 $19) 0-1 |
|
| Feb-25-05 | | Jaymthegenius: My other game is
[Event "Blitz:5'"]
[Site "Boston"]
[Date "2005.02.21"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Jay"]
[Black "Deep Shredder 9"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C23"]
[Annotator "Deep Shredder 9 (30s)"]
[PlyCount "81"]
C23: ♗ishop's Opening: 2...♗c5 1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nc6 3. f4 exf4 4. Nc3 Nf6 5.
Nf3 Bb4 6. O-O O-O 7. Nd5 $146 (7. d3 d6 (7... Bxc3 8. bxc3 d5 9. exd5 Nxd5 10.
Bxd5 Qxd5 11. Bxf4 Qc5+ 12. Kh1 Qxc3 13. Bxc7 Bg4 14. Rb1 b6 15. h3 Bh5 16. Rb5
Bxf3 17. Qxf3 Qxc2 18. Rg5 f6 19. Bd6 Qxa2 20. Rg3 Ne5 21. Qe4 Rfe8 22. Bxe5
Hromadka,♔-♖eti,♖/♗aden 1914/HCL/1/2-1/2 (33)) 8. Bxf4 Bg4 9. Bg5 Bxc3 10.
bxc3 Ne5 11. Bb3 Nxf3+ 12. gxf3 Be6 13. f4 c6 14. Kh1 Kh8 15. c4 Bh3 16. Rg1 h6
17. Bh4 Rg8 18. e5 dxe5 19. fxe5 Qd4 20. Bxf6 gxf6 21. Qf3 Bg2+
Swiderski,♖-Mieses,J/Vienna 1903/HCL/0-1) (7. e5 Ng4 (7... Nh5 8. Nd5 d6 9. d4
Be6 10. Qe2 dxe5 11. Nxb4 Nxb4 12. Bxe6 fxe6 13. c3 Nc6 14. Nxe5 Nxe5 15. Qxe5
Qd5 16. Qe2 Rf5 17. Bd2 Raf8 18. Rae1 R8f6 19. b3 c5 20. Qc4 Qc6 21. Re5 Rxe5
22. dxe5 Teichmann,♖-Mieses,J/Vienna 1903/HCL/0-1) 8. d4 d6 9. h3 Ne3 10.
Bxe3 fxe3 11. Nd5 Ba5 12. exd6 Qxd6 13. Ng5 Qg6 14. Nxf7 Rxf7 15. Ne7+ Nxe7 16.
Bxf7+ Qxf7 17. Rxf7 1-0 Chigorin,M-Schlechter,C/London 1899/HCL) 7... Nxd5 8.
exd5 Ne7 9. Ng5 h6 10. Ne4 Ng6 11. c3 Ba5 12. d4 Re8 13. Bd3 Qh4 14. Nd2 Qg5
15. Bxg6 Qxg6 16. Nc4 Qa6 17. Nxa5 Qxa5 18. d6 cxd6 19. Bxf4 b6 20. Bxh6 gxh6
21. Qf3 Bb7 22. Qxb7 Qb5 23. Qf3 f5 24. Qh5 Qxb2 25. Qg6+ Kh8 26. Qxh6+ Kg8 27.
Qg6+ Kh8 28. Qxf5 Qxc3 29. Qf6+ Kh7 30. Kh1 Rf8 31. Qh4+ Kg8 32. Qg5+ Kh8 33.
Qh6+ Kg8 34. Qg6+ Kh8 35. Qxd6 Rf7 36. Qe5+ Rg7 37. Rae1 Qc4 (37... Qc2 38. Re2
Qg6 $18) 38. Qh5+ Kg8 39. Re8+ Rxe8 40. Qxe8+ Kh7 41. Qh5+ (41. Qh5+ Kg8 42.
Re1 $18) 1-0 |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | Albertan: Csmath I agree with your statement concerning Shredder 9 and the bugs it has.To think I bought Shredder 6 and it also had bugs too. Why would Chessbase buy the program and sell it when it is has these bugs in most every version? |
|
| Mar-01-05 | | Jaymthegenius: I keep on getting a message "please adjust my clock!" on the deep Shredder 9. Though its playing strength is not effected in any way, and this message can simply be ignored (I tried adjusting the clock many times, so now I simply just play at the 60 minute increment, only winning against it's 1850 setting which is the lowest, and on Unleased! I Last anywhere from 20-40 moves and anylize the game.) |
|
| May-27-05 | | WorldChampeen: If anyone can enlighten me as to how I can get the "opening book" you know read out at the bottom, what all of the bar graphs mean; please feel free too. Also, I am curious as to the feature, "coach is watching." I've seen people speaking about "deep Shredder 9" a few times, but all mine says is Shredder Classic 1.2. http://www.shredderchess.com/?sourc... Does speak about all of the versions, I guess I have the beginning version. Any observations, pros, cons on Shredder, would be welcome. |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 2 OF 9 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
Kibitzing
