|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 113 OF 750 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
| Jun-12-06 | | LIFE Master AJ: I understand, I look forward to the next game. (Thanks for the entertainment.) If both of these games are draws ... (or even if Shredder wins this next one); this might lend some credence to my claim that there might be something wrong with the way some of these other tests were conducted. I want to stress again, that i followed these games pretty closely. Both parties did a great job! (It was fun to follow.) |
|
| Jun-12-06 | | capatal: <Dionyseus + Rybka>
<WannaBe + Shredder>COMPrehensive
COMPetition
Good show! |
|
| Jun-12-06 | | themadhair: <LMAJ> I think that out of all the currently available engines only Shredder seems to pose a problem to Rybka. This could be case of a clash of styles, but whatever it is Shredder does seem to have a slight edge on Rybka. On my computer Rybka consistantly smashes fritz with in turn mauls shredder which completes the circle by mashing Rybka. |
|
| Jun-12-06 | | blingice: <LIFE Master AJ: this might lend some credence to my claim that there might be something wrong with the way some of these other tests were conducted. > ...or the fact that these computers were allowed to think as long as they pleased, whereas the ones tested were under time controls... |
|
Jun-12-06
 | | WannaBe: I hope everyone realizes this was done partially for fun. We did not have the same computer/hardware, and we allowed an infinitely amount of time for the computer to 'think'. Thank you. |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | Dionyseus: <themadhair> Shredder does not have any edge over Rybka, Rybka is rated about 100 points higher than Deep Shredder 10 in all rating lists, and that was before the new Rybka 2 (multiprocessor support) came out.
http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_... According to CEGT 40/40 (40 moves in 40 minutes) list, Rybka 1.2f beats Deep Shredder 10 2CPU 75% of the time.
Actually, looking at the list of Rybka 1.2f's opponents, Zappa Paderborn 2CPU, Toga II, and Hiarcs X50 perform a little bit better against Rybka than does Deep Shredder 10 2CPU. http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_... |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | chessmoron: <WannaBe> <Dionyseus> What's the avg. (or about) time that each computer 'think' about which move to make? |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | chessmoron: Also CSS rating list is a good one. http://www.computerschach.de/cssran... |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | Dionyseus: <ChessMoron> In the match me and <WannaBe> did, there were some moves in which we let the computer think for over 5 hours. This game was sorta like an email correspondence game, except it was only Rybka vs Shredder 10, and a little bit of human manipulation (sometimes the scores for moves were identical and we had to choose one of them, etc) . |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | LIFE Master AJ: <Jun-12-06
WannaBe: I hope everyone realizes this was done partially for fun. We did not have the same computer/hardware, and we allowed an infinitely amount of time for the computer to 'think'.
Thank you.>
Fun is fun, and that is great. I followed this game rather closely, one night I fell asleep with the position on my computer ... letting Fritz run on it all night. It was still a pretty good computer game ... even if the time controls were not strictly monitored ... and the platforms were not exactly the same. (Just my opinion, feel free to disregard it completely.) |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | themadhair: <Dionyseus>
I posted <I think that out of all the currently available engines only Shredder seems to pose a problem to Rybka. This could be case of a clash of styles, but whatever it is Shredder does seem to have a slight edge on Rybka. On my computer Rybka consistantly smashes fritz with in turn mauls shredder which completes the circle by mashing Rybka.> When I posted this I was well aware of the rating lists. I am on the bandwagon that Rybka is possibly the best thing since Deep Blue. But you can't deny that Shredder seems to be holding its own against Rybka in competition. It seems the only engine that is capable of beating Rybka in a game. This may be due to some clever tweaking by Stefan (most likely IMO). In the last competition I expected Shredder to beat Rybka in their game. I still expected Rybka to run away with the rest of it though.<According to CEGT 40/40 (40 moves in 40 minutes) list, Rybka 1.2f beats Deep Shredder 10 2CPU 75% of the time.> If rating lists were absolute this would be true. In reality while Rybka still does better it is getting nowhere near 75%. Consider (http://pphl.opencounter.de/dlcount....) hosted on the second link you posted. Final score for Rybka against Shredder is 53%. That doesn't include Stefan working his magic either. Shredder does seems to be able to notch more than a few victories against Rybka. Incidentally I would love to see a correspondance computer championship. My money would be on Shredder. |
|
Jun-13-06
| | WannaBe: On average, Shredder can reach a favorable 'decision' in about 20 minutes. The longest one was the Nh5 or Rab8 move. I let that one go for about an hour+ and it was still tied. Of course, in a standard 40/2 + hour game, this can't happen. =) |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | chessmoron: <WannaBe> <Dionyseus> Thanks for the information, guys. |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | Dionyseus: <themadhair> The error you made is that you used only the 16 games between Rybka 1.2f 32-bit and Deep Shredder 10 2CPU. Rybka 1.2f 32-bit won that match by a score of 8.5-7.5, scoring 53% just as CEGT said here:
http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_... In the Rybka 1.2f 64-bit vs Deep Shredder 10 2CPU match of 20 games, Rybka 1.2f 64-bit won by a score of 15-5, scoring 75% just as CEGT reported here:
http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_... Both of those matches are included in that large pgn file, an easy way to find the Rybka 64-bit vs Deep Shredder 10 match using the filter feature in Fritz 9 gui is to put
Rybka 1.2f 64-bit as last name,
and Deep Shredder as last name for second player. Make sure there's a checkmark for "ignore colors." Why is 64-bits an important distinction? Well according to the author, Vasik, the 64-bit version of Rybka 1.2f is approximately 60% faster than the 32-bit version. <themadhair> Shredder does not and has never held its own against Rybka, you cannot base anything on one or two games. As I told you before, Zap Paderborn 2CPU, Toga II, and Hiarcs perform a bit better against Rybka than does Deep Shredder 10 2CPU. <It seems the only engine that is capable of beating Rybka in a game> This is simply not true, just take a look at how it scored against its opponents: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_...
Looking at that table, you can see that Rybka 1.2f 64-bit scored 13 wins, 13 draws, and lost 5 times to Zap Paderborn 2CPU.
Rybka 1.2f 64-bit scored 15 wins, 8 draws, and lost 5 games to Hiarcs x50.
Rybka is clearly the strongest engine, but only by about 100 points (at the moment). Does 100 points mean that Rybka is expected to win every single game, every single tournament? Not at all, in fact it's expected to win 63% and lose 37% of the time against opponents rated 100 points lower. Take a look at the rating expectancies vs differences table here: http://chess.about.com/library/week... |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | themadhair: <Dionseus> I am NOT disputing the CEGT results. The point I was trying to make above in my previous posts is that in competition Shredder has held its own against Rybka. You can't disagree with that. As a question - has Rybka ever defeated Shredder in an official competition? To the best of my knowledge the answer is no. <Rybka is clearly the strongest engine, but only by about 100 points (at the moment). Does 100 points mean that Rybka is expected to win every single game, every single tournament?> I'm not disputing this. I think you may have confused me with a certain Rybka critic here. I retract my earlier comment regarding the 53% result I posted - that just happened to be the first file I downloaded. I apologise for that bit of lazy research on my part. |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | brankat: <WannaBe> Time to forget about Rybka & Shredder for a while, and focus on L.Vegas. Susan is waiting for You:-) Ready to get skinned alive? Said Your prayers? Drawn up Your Will? I'd like to have the book on B.Fischer:-) On the other hand, should You survive, I assume we can look forward to some great photos. You could take a snapshot of Susan every time she approaches Your board. That may throw her off focus :-)
Btw, don't forget to get her autograph! Best of luck. |
|
Jun-13-06
| | WannaBe: <brankat> If I get skinned alive, I'm donating my body to science. My books are yours, provide you come down and haul away all 450+ volumns. Pictures, yes. I'll be sure to set my flash on, and point it right at Ms. Polgar's eyes as she nears my board. That'll work to my advantage. I'll try to get an autograph. =) There are people on the list http://www.lvchessfestival.com/natl... that doesn't have picture here, I'm gonna try to get as many as I can and submit them to CG. Since you're knowledge is deep and full of life experience, I have this question... There are 2 players in my section, who have no game(s) played recorded in the USCF database. They are technically unrated player. Why would they play 2 sections up? Are they confident of their abilities? Or you think they may be trusting their on-line rating?? I'm a bit nervous, but I think I'll be fine. |
|
| Jun-13-06 | | brankat: <WannaBe> When I played competitive/tournament Chess there were no ratings systems. Categorization was different, IMO, more reasonable. So, I don't really know how this works today. I can more or less try to speculate in regards to Your question. First, and this is no speculation, do not underestimate anybody, as a matter of principle, regardless of their ratings. As for these 2 guys, I don't believe they should have any valid reason to rely on their on-line ratings. It is mostly useless. For example, when I played <hitman84> & <mandar> on QA my ratings was about 2200 (Master's level), although I had a total of less than 10 games, and not strong competition. Now, these 2 were the strongest I had played there yet, but had low ratings(1500), since they just started at QA. I drew both games, and lost 100 points, while they gained 50 each! Now I am about to defeat a player that doesn't even come close to one <hitman> but had 2250 ratings, so my rating will go back to 2200(and of course my strength is not that of a Master). Anyway, Your 2 competitors are probably confident enough, since it is relatively easy to assess one's own level if one is objective enough. You just need to play a couple of games against 3-4 players of different ratings levels, and You will know where You belong. Also, they are probably eager to gain points and, of course, if an unrated player does well 2 sections above, he/she can get a lot of points fast. So, it is a bit of a gamble. Don't worry about it too much. Approach every game seriously, try to concentrate, take Your time. It is important that You play patiently, and with a measure of self-confidence. Remind Yourself that Your opponents are in Your group, because they are not stronger players than Yourself. Try to look at each game as a completely separate entity, so that a possible negative outcome of one game doesn't affect Your performance in the next. This is not easy, since it gets to be an emotional issue, but one has to try. If You take some of the above thoughts even as only a vague guideline, I'm confident You'll be just fine. All the best to You. |
|
Jun-13-06
| | WannaBe: <brankat> Thank you very much. Please send me an e-mail, with your physical address (snail mail) to kstc_jyu@yahoo.com |
|
| Jun-14-06 | | brankat: <WannaBe> I've just sent You an e-mail, 9:00 P.M. Pacific Time. I hope I didn't mess it up so You can recieve it, since this is the first e-mail I did in years. |
|
| Jun-14-06 | | NakoSonorense: Hey wannabe, will you let Susan know that you're the funny guy with the av of bugs bunny on chessgames? Or will you remain anonymous? Consider it carefully. She might start laughing and in the meantime you can have a chance to flip the board, dont you think so? Make sure to do this after move 7 or 8, otherwise if you do it earlier it might not benefit you at all. Uhm, of course, I'm not insinuating that you can't actually beat her... just a thought. :) Good luck! |
|
Jun-14-06
| | WannaBe: <NakoSonorense> I plan to put on my jester hat (see http://mysite.verizon.net/jyu1/USCh...) when she isn't paying attention, and after she can't stop laughing, then I'll turn on my camera's flash, I'm guaranteed an upset!! If you got any chess bucks left, put it on me!! |
|
| Jun-14-06 | | Robin01: Have a great time in Vegas!! |
|
| Jun-14-06 | | Zebra: <Wannabe> Good luck in the tournament. And... be gentle with Mrs Polgar ;-) |
|
| Jun-14-06 | | suenteus po 147: <WannaBe> The big day is almost here. Are you participating in the open section or in your rated section? How many rounds will you have to play? |
|
 |
|
|
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 113 OF 750 ·
Later Kibitzing> |
|
|
|
Kibitzing
