Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 06:03:40 12/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2000 at 02:37:54, Frank Quisinsky wrote:
>On December 25, 2000 at 20:31:21, Peter Berger wrote:
>
>>On December 25, 2000 at 18:33:39, Frank Quisinsky wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>I mean for marketing ... !
>>>
>>>On the other hand ... Shredder lose not 1 game in the latest 5 important
>>>tournaments. This program is strong, very strong !
>>>
>>>Intersting is a tournament from the TOP 4 programs:
>>>
>>>Deep Fritz, Shredder, Chess Tiger and Gandalf !
>>>Here a tournament all against all other 100 games, fast PC and I think 40 moves
>>>in 40 minutes is enough.
>>>
>>>I think you can here better see what is the best computer program for a match
>>>against Anand. And believe me ... Gandalf make not the latest place !
>>>
>>>Best
>>>Frank
>>
>>Hmm , I wouldn't be too surprised if Gandalf ended last in this tournament ;-) ;
>>but maybe this is only because I don't own this super hardware where it is said
>>to be unbeatable ..
>>
>>These are the TOP 4 ? May I add 4 more ?
>>
>>Nimzo 8 , Junior 6 , Rebel Century 3.0 , Chessmaster 8000 .
>>
>>Are you really sure that your 4 would be higher ranked than "my" 4 and none of
>>these 4 could end as overall winner of this big contest :-) ?
>
>I know results from over 1.200 games. I think this is enough to say it is one of
>the best programs.
>
>I don`t know the new Chessmaster and saw not enough games. Nimzo 8 and Junior 6
>are very strong but I think Fritz, Gandalf, Tiger and Shredder are better. Rebel
>Century is also very strong, here I believe that the other 4 programs are
>stronger. I am not sure ! Gandalf has problems against Century and Shredder
>(44-48% with longer time controls). Problems against Chess Tiger (48%) not
>against Gambit-Tiger and all other TOP programs with longer time controls and an
>fast PC. But all other TOP programs have problems against different other TOP
>programs, I think this is interesting.
>
>Nimzo 8 started at the moment in my CCE tourney. After 5:3 against Comet B.27,
>now 3.5 : 2.5 against Crafty 17.14. More results coming soon. I think Nimzo 8.0
>is not one of the best programs. Gandalf has also not very big problems against
>all Nimzo versions.
As you mentioned before certain programs perform better than others against a
particular program, for instance Crafty 17.14 after 72 games at G/10 Blitz had
an even score against Nimzo 8, but I started another match between Crafty 17.14
vs Nimzo 8 at Tournament time control both programs using Nimzo 8.ctg and so far
after 10 games the score is still even. Since I don't want to take too much
space by posting all these games, I will only post two games. Is Crafty really
that good or Nimzo 8 .ctg opening book is making it play even better?
[Event "K6-2 500 , 120'/40+60'/20+30'"]
[Site "Engines Match"]
[Date "2000.12.25"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Nimzo 8"]
[Black "Crafty 17.14"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D85"]
[WhiteElo "2600"]
[BlackElo "2590"]
[PlyCount "129"]
{W=13.8 ply; 355kN/s
B=14.1 ply; 155kN/s
} 1. d4 {3} 1... Nf6 {3} 2. c4 {2}
2... g6 {1} 3. Nc3 {1} 3... d5 {1} 4. cxd5 {1} 4... Nxd5 {0} 5. e4 {1} 5...
Nxc3 {0} 6. bxc3 {0} 6... Bg7 {1} 7. Nf3 {1} 7... c5 {1} 8. Rb1 {1} 8... O-O {1
} 9. Be2 {0} 9... cxd4 {1} 10. cxd4 {0} 10... Qa5+ {0} 11. Qd2 {0} 11... Qxd2+
{0} 12. Bxd2 {0} 12... b6 {1} 13. Rc1 {1} 13... Bb7 {0} 14. d5 {0} 14... Na6 {0
} 15. Bg5 {0} 15... Rfc8 {0} 16. O-O {1} 16... Kf8 {0} 17. e5 {0} 17... h6 {0}
18. Bh4 {0} 18... g5 {0} 19. Bg3 {0} 19... Rxc1 {0} 20. Rxc1 {0} 20... Nc5 {0}
21. d6 {0} 21... Rd8 {0} 22. h4 {Both last book move 0} 22... exd6 {
-0.30/13 440} 23. exd6 {0.07/12 118} 23... Ne4 {-0.30/13 376} 24. Rc7 {
-0.24/13 202} 24... Bd5 {-0.36/13 376} 25. Be5 {(hxg5) -0.57/14 1300} 25...
Bxa2 {-0.32/12 431} 26. hxg5 {-0.43/14 1807} 26... hxg5 {-0.42/14 371} 27.
Bxg7+ {-0.43/14 513} 27... Kxg7 {-0.40/15 371} 28. Rxa7 {-0.38/15 717} 28...
Nc3 {(Bd5) -0.41/15 371} 29. Bf1 {(Ba6) -0.65/15 663} 29... Rxd6 {-0.60/16 371}
30. Ra3 {-0.58/15 441} 30... Rc6 {-0.61/16 371} 31. Nxg5 {-0.58/13 97} 31...
Bd5 {-0.59/14 392} 32. Nh3 {(Ra7) -0.49/13 138} 32... b5 {-0.60/15 369} 33. Nf4
{-0.43/12 40} 33... b4 {-0.52/15 369} 34. Ra7 {-0.52/14 443} 34... Ba2 {
(Rc5) -0.51/13 417} 35. Rb7 {-0.15/12 42} 35... b3 {-0.67/14 362} 36. Nd3 {
-0.16/12 262} 36... Ne4 {(Na4) -0.78/13 386} 37. Ne5 {0.00/13 92} 37... Rc1 {
(Rf6) -0.71/15 355} 38. Rxf7+ {-1.03/12 77} 38... Kg8 {-2.71/16 354} 39. Rb7 {
-1.52/13 68} 39... Nd2 {-2.92/15 354} 40. Rb8+ {-1.57/13 65} 40... Kg7 {
-3.12/14 177} 41. Rb7+ {-1.55/15 555} 41... Kf8 {-3.22/14 189} 42. Nd7+ {
(g3) -1.57/14 305} 42... Ke7 {-3.47/14 189} 43. Nc5+ {(g4) -1.58/15 473} 43...
Kf6 {-3.67/13 189} 44. Rb6+ {(Nd7+) -1.66/14 288} 44... Kf5 {-3.74/13 206} 45.
Rb5 {-1.66/14 291} 45... Rxf1+ {-3.80/14 189} 46. Kh2 {-1.49/5 0} 46... Kf4 {
(Kf6) -3.76/13 195} 47. Rb4+ {-1.63/11 57} 47... Ke5 {-3.83/14 188} 48. f3 {
-1.72/14 401} 48... Kd5 {-3.92/14 187} 49. Nxb3 {(Na4) -1.72/13 74} 49... Bxb3
{(Nxb3) -5.02/13 220} 50. Kg3 {-1.75/14 253} 50... Ke5 {-5.01/12 185} 51. Rh4 {
(Rb8) -1.78/14 271} 51... Be6 {(Bd5) -5.01/12 184} 52. Rh5+ {(Rh8) -1.75/12 35}
52... Bf5 {(Kd6) -5.12/14 184} 53. Rh4 {(Kh2) -1.75/13 45} 53... Nb3 {
-5.18/12 185} 54. Ra4 {-1.79/12 41} 54... Rd1 {(Bd3) -5.15/12 184} 55. Ra7 {
(f4+) -1.86/12 102} 55... Rd2 {-5.46/12 193} 56. Ra3 {-2.07/13 200} 56... Nd4 {
(Be6) -5.63/13 183} 57. Ra5+ {-2.13/12 85} 57... Kf6 {-5.77/13 182} 58. Kf4 {
(Ra8) -2.12/12 51} 58... Rxg2 {-7.02/12 185} 59. Ke3 {-2.27/12 25} 59... Ne6 {
-7.19/13 180} 60. Rb5 {(Ra4) -9.77/13 74} 60... Re2+ {(Nf4) -7.59/12 90} 61.
Kxe2 {-5.33/5 0} 61... Nd4+ {-7.59/14 54} 62. Ke3 {-9.69/17 72} 62... Nxb5 {
-7.50/13 53} 63. Kd2 {(Kf4) -9.99/16 66} 63... Kg5 {(Ke5) -7.50/11 52} 64. Kc1
{(Ke3) -10.04/18 91} 64... Kf4 {-7.60/12 52} 65. Kb2 {-10.22/16 25} 0-1
[Event "K6-2 500 , 120'/40+60'/20+30'"]
[Site "Engines Match"]
[Date "2000.12.26"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Crafty 17.14"]
[Black "Nimzo 8"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D85"]
[WhiteElo "2590"]
[BlackElo "2600"]
[PlyCount "166"]
{W=13.4 ply; 158kN/s
B=12.4 ply; 341kN/s
} 1. d4 {3} 1... Nf6 {3} 2. c4 {2}
2... g6 {1} 3. Nc3 {1} 3... d5 {1} 4. cxd5 {1} 4... Nxd5 {0} 5. e4 {1} 5...
Nxc3 {0} 6. bxc3 {0} 6... Bg7 {1} 7. Nf3 {1} 7... c5 {1} 8. Rb1 {1} 8... O-O {1
} 9. Be2 {0} 9... cxd4 {1} 10. cxd4 {0} 10... Qa5+ {0} 11. Qd2 {0} 11... Qxd2+
{0} 12. Bxd2 {0} 12... b6 {1} 13. Rc1 {1} 13... Bb7 {0} 14. d5 {0} 14... Na6 {0
} 15. Bg5 {0} 15... Rfc8 {0} 16. O-O {1} 16... Kf8 {0} 17. e5 {0} 17... h6 {0}
18. Bh4 {0} 18... g5 {0} 19. Bg3 {0} 19... Rxc1 {0} 20. Rxc1 {0} 20... Nc5 {0}
21. d6 {0} 21... Rd8 {0} 22. h4 {Both last book move 0} 22... g4 {-0.14/13 451}
23. Nd2 {-0.28/13 403} 23... h5 {0.01/12 177} 24. Re1 {(f3) -0.32/11 420} 24...
Bh6 {(f5) -0.27/12 258} 25. Rd1 {-0.29/13 400} 25... Bc6 {-0.41/12 214} 26. f3
{(Nf1) -0.10/13 400} 26... Ba4 {(Na4) -0.49/13 535} 27. Nb3 {0.13/14 401} 27...
Nxb3 {-0.75/12 121} 28. axb3 {0.00/15 400} 28... Bxb3 {-0.60/12 42} 29. Ra1 {
-0.13/14 400} 29... Be3+ {(exd6) -0.32/12 148} 30. Kh2 {(Kf1) -0.05/14 400}
30... a5 {(Be6) -0.77/15 1649} 31. fxg4 {0.00/15 400} 31... exd6 {-0.87/13 677}
32. exd6 {0.03/15 415} 32... Bc5 {-1.00/12 100} 33. gxh5 {0.03/14 398} 33...
Bxd6 {-0.95/11 95} 34. Rc1 {-0.04/12 444} 34... Bc5 {(a4) -0.93/11 211} 35. h6
{(Bf4) 0.13/12 439} 35... Kg8 {-1.21/12 312} 36. Rc3 {0.00/13 379} 36... a4 {
-1.03/10 147} 37. Be5 {(Bf4) -0.16/12 383} 37... Kh7 {-0.82/11 121} 38. Bf4 {
(Rg3) -0.34/12 404} 38... f6 {(f5) -1.33/11 153} 39. Bd3+ {(Bc1) 0.18/13 364}
39... Kh8 {-1.48/11 44} 40. Bg6 {(Bf5) 0.01/12 182} 40... Bg8 {
(a3) -1.50/11 323} 41. Bc1 {0.09/12 253} 41... Bd4 {(Bh7) -1.82/11 376} 42. Rc6
{(Rd3) 0.04/12 187} 42... b5 {(Be5+) -1.56/10 141} 43. Ra6 {0.11/13 186} 43...
Be5+ {(Bh7) -0.98/12 753} 44. Kh3 {0.08/13 186} 44... Rc8 {(Rd1) -1.05/12 455}
45. Bd2 {0.12/13 186} 45... Bb2 {-1.18/10 66} 46. Bf5 {0.00/12 202} 46... Rd8 {
-0.96/11 134} 47. Ba5 {0.00/12 276} 47... Re8 {-0.99/11 108} 48. Bg6 {
0.00/12 178} 48... Rc8 {-1.02/12 300} 49. Bf5 {0.00/13 177} 49... Rb8 {
(Re8) -0.70/11 54} 50. Bb4 {0.22/12 194} 50... Bh7 {-0.57/13 602} 51. Bg4 {
(Bxh7) 0.32/11 228} 51... Be5 {(Re8) -1.17/12 532} 52. Be2 {(Bf3) 0.15/11 177}
52... Be4 {-1.28/11 227} 53. Be7 {(g3) -0.31/12 569} 53... Rg8 {-2.54/11 87}
54. Bxf6+ {-1.55/13 373} 54... Bxf6 {-3.14/12 98} 55. Rxf6 {-1.55/13 68} 55...
a3 {-3.89/12 269} 56. g4 {-1.15/12 69} 56... a2 {(b4) -4.58/13 113} 57. Ra6 {
-1.36/15 68} 57... Ra8 {-4.54/15 137} 58. Rxa2 {-1.56/15 68} 58... Rxa2 {
-4.49/14 16} 59. Bxb5 {-1.49/14 68} 59... Ra3+ {-4.55/13 35} 60. Kh2 {
-1.50/14 34} 60... Kh7 {-4.58/15 52} 61. Bf1 {(Bd7) -2.61/13 257} 61... Kxh6 {
-4.57/14 56} 62. Bc4 {(Bb5) -2.75/14 45} 62... Rc3 {(Kg6) -4.66/12 12} 63. Be6
{(Bb5) -3.67/13 96} 63... Kg6 {-5.28/12 11} 64. Bd7 {-4.12/13 41} 64... Kf6 {
-6.38/12 15} 65. Kg1 {-5.01/12 45} 65... Ke7 {(Ke5) -7.35/14 60} 66. Bb5 {
-4.79/13 39} 66... Rg3+ {-7.29/13 40} 67. Kf2 {-5.01/13 38} 67... Rg2+ {
(Rxg4) -7.55/15 29} 68. Ke3 {-5.01/14 36} 68... Rxg4 {-7.88/17 56} 69. h5 {
-5.01/13 36} 69... Rh4 {-7.85/14 15} 70. h6 {(Be2) -5.01/13 34} 70... Bh7 {
(Bf5) -8.42/13 10} 71. Bc6 {(Ke2) -5.01/14 34} 71... Kd6 {(Rxh6) -8.53/14 18}
72. Bb7 {(Bb5) -5.01/13 33} 72... Ke5 {(Rxh6) -8.63/14 22} 73. Bc6 {
(Bg2) -5.01/13 31} 73... Rh3+ {(Rxh6) -8.71/13 26} 74. Ke2 {(Kd2) -5.01/13 31}
74... Bd3+ {(Rxh6) -9.30/12 32} 75. Kf2 {(Ke1) -5.01/13 30} 75... Kf4 {
(Rxh6) -13.96/13 24} 76. h7 {-8.01/12 59} 76... Rh2+ {(Rxh7) -#13/13 33} 77.
Bg2 {(Kg1) -#7/13 95} 77... Bxh7 {(Rxh7) -#8/12 10} 78. Kf1 {-#6/13 25} 78...
Bd3+ {-#4/8 1} 79. Kf2 {(Kg1) -#5/13 24} 79... Be4 {-#3/7 1} 80. Ke2 {-#4/12 23
} 80... Rxg2+ {-#2/5 0} 81. Kd1 {-#3/11 22} 81... Ke3 {(Ra2) -#1/5 1} 82. Kc1 {
-#2/10 22} 82... Bd3 {(Ra2) #0/5 2} 83. Kd1 {-#1/4 0} 83... Rg1# {#0/5 1} 0-1
>But all these programs are very interesting.
>
>>It seems to me that the competition at the top is closer than ever . And I also
>>think to find out who is the best opponent for Anand this tournament wouldn't
>>help at all.
>
>The best program against a good GM is a programs which play good in tactical
>positions and good in attack chess.
>
>LCT-II test: Gandalf is number 1 !
>GS-2930 test: Gandalf solved 10 problems, I believe under the top 3 !
>BS-2930 test: Over 2.700 ELO and I believe under the top 3 !
>
>Gandalf plays the best attack chess from all programs which I saw, have a lot of
>knowledge and so I have the opinion that Gandalf is a good program for a match
>against a SUPER GM !
>
>I am sure, so I can write this ... no problem !
>
>Best
>Frank
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.