Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hiarcs7.32: "I am not Impressed"

Author: Anon

Date: 00:58:49 09/22/99

Go up one level in this thread


On September 21, 1999 at 20:17:19, Mark Young wrote:

>On September 21, 1999 at 19:12:07, odell hall wrote:
>
>>On September 21, 1999 at 17:54:55, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>On September 21, 1999 at 15:00:14, odell hall wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hi
>>>>
>>>>  Has anyone noticed the often bizarre and irresponsible play of Hiarcs7.32?
>>>>It is hard to believe this program is so celebrated here at CCC, the program has
>>>>some obvious flaws that I think any Astute Human master could easily exploit.
>>>>Last night I played it on my AMD k6-2 350 40mb, at 40\1hr, and nearly won, after
>>>>the game I analyzed with fritz5.32, it pointed out atleast five missed wins on
>>>>my part. Some may some, "well what are you talking about you lost didn't you"?,
>>>>True but the point that I am making is that a player of my level should never of
>>>>had hiarcs in such a position (uscf 1804). Analyzing the game with junior,
>>>>fritz, and chessmaster they all made superior moves than hiarcs, and avoiding
>>>>the trouble. If I were a computer chess operator on icc i would not feel
>>>>comfortable playing hiarcs7.32 against titled players in anything over game\30.
>>>>Don't get me wrong I am not basing my accessment on just this one game, but
>>>>many. I think the biggest problem with hiarcs7 is the queenside Castling bug?
>>>>Here is the Game, to illustrate what I am talking about.
>>>
>>>I have not looked at the game yet, but I seen some other say there Hiarcs did
>>>not play the same moves. And I see you are using an AMD chip, I have found games
>>>played on the AMD chip that could not be reproduced by an intel chip.
>>>
>>>>
>>  Hi Mark
>>
>>
>>  I considered this possibility you mentioned, the only thing that makes me
>>doubt that it is the chip is the fact, that when I play hiarcs7. in computer vs
>>computer games on my machine it "destroyes" everything. I beat a friend of mine
>>who has CM6000 in a six game match, this makes me think it is not the chip.
>
>I will not try and keep guessing what is going on in this game, but there was
>some strange things between your scores, times, and evals. Then what I could
>reproduce. I tried to reproduce some of the moves and evals by playing though
>the games as if I were playing it myself. I tried again taking the learning file
>out of Hiarcs. I tried in watch mode. This may just be how hiarcs 7.32 is or
>this may point to some kind of problem.
>
>I will give one example.
>
>Your move 21. Hiarcs played h5 and search 511 sec. or 8 1/2 min to do a 8 ply
>search. My hiarcs never played h5 in this position at ply 8 and I tried many
>times and many ways, and it only took 4 1/4 mins to hit a 9 ply search. We are
>about the same speed, I was running a P II 400 with the same hash as you at
>39936kB.
>
>
>
>as I were playing the game.
>
>1r3rk1/p1q3b1/2P1b2p/3n1p2/N3p2P/8/PPQBPPB1/1K1R3R w - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32:
>
>21...Ne7 22.Be3
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 1   00:00:00
>21...Ne7 22.Bc3
>  +-  (2.16)   depth: 2/5   00:00:00
>21...Ne7 22.Rc1
>  +-  (2.27)   depth: 2/11   00:00:00
>21...Rfc8 22.Bxe4
>  +-  (2.19)   depth: 2/11   00:00:00
>21...Rfc8 22.Bh3 Nb4
>  +-  (2.16)   depth: 3/11   00:00:00
>21...Rfc8 22.Bh3 Nb4
>  +-  (2.16)   depth: 4/11   00:00:00
>21...Rfc8 22.Bh1 Nb4 23.Bxb4 Rxb4 24.Rc1
>  +-  (1.98)   depth: 5/19   00:00:00  12kN
>21.h5
>  +-  (2.68)   depth: 1   00:00:00
>21.h5
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 2/3   00:00:00
>21.h5 Rfc8
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 2/3   00:00:00
>21.Rhg1 Ne7
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 2/8   00:00:00
>21.Rhg1 Ne7
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 3/8   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4
>  +-  (2.34)   depth: 3/8   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4
>  +-  (2.34)   depth: 3/8   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4
>  +-  (1.98)   depth: 4/8   00:00:00
>21.h5 Rfc8 22.Rc1 Ne7 23.Be3 Qxc6 24.Bxa7
>  +-  (1.59)   depth: 4/12   00:00:00
>21.Rhg1 Ne7
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 4/12   00:00:00
>21.Rhg1 Ne7
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 5/12   00:00:00  1kN
>21.Rhg1 Rfc8 22.Bh1
>  +-  (1.98)   depth: 6/12   00:00:00  2kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4
>  +-  (1.73)   depth: 7/23   00:00:04  169kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.b3 Rc8 24.Qc5 Qxc6
>  +-  (1.57)   depth: 7/25   00:00:07  251kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4
>  ±  (1.32)   depth: 8/25   00:00:51  1788kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.Bh3 Qf7 24.Ka1 Rc4 25.Nc3 Rxc6
>  ±  (1.26)   depth: 8/27   00:01:07  2343kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4
>  ±  (1.01)   depth: 9/27   00:04:15  8334kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.Bf1 Rfb8 24.Rd2 Rc8 25.Nc3 Qxc6 26.Rg3
>  ±  (0.91)   depth: 9/29   00:05:19  10524kN
>21.Rh3 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.Rg3 Rc4 24.Nc3 Rxc6 25.Rg1 Rc8
>  ±  (0.96)   depth: 9/29   00:08:57  17718kN
>
>(Young,  9/21/99)
>
>
>In watch mode, after restart.
>
>1r3rk1/p1q3b1/2P1b2p/3n1p2/N3p2P/8/PPQBPPB1/1K1R3R w - - 0 1
>
>Analysis by Hiarcs 7.32:
>
>21.h5
>  +-  (2.68)   depth: 1   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4
>  +-  (2.34)   depth: 2/4   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nf4 22.Bxf4 Qxf4
>  +-  (2.33)   depth: 2/6   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4
>  +-  (2.34)   depth: 3/8   00:00:00
>21.h5 Nb4
>  +-  (2.09)   depth: 4/10   00:00:00
>21.h5 Rfc8 22.Rc1 Ne7 23.Be3 Qxc6 24.Bxa7
>  +-  (1.59)   depth: 4/12   00:00:00
>21.Qc5 Ne7 22.Rc1 Rfd8
>  +-  (1.90)   depth: 4/14   00:00:00
>21.Qc5 Rfc8
>  +-  (1.63)   depth: 5/19   00:00:01  32kN
>21.Qc5 Rfc8 22.Rc1 Nb6 23.Nc3 Qxc6 24.Qxc6 Rxc6
>  ±  (1.40)   depth: 5/21   00:00:01  45kN
>21.h5 Rfc8 22.Rc1 Ne7 23.Be3 Qxc6 24.Bxa7
>  +-  (1.59)   depth: 5/21   00:00:01  52kN
>21.Rhg1 Ne7 22.Bc3 Bxc3 23.Qxc3 Qxc6
>  +-  (1.91)   depth: 5/21   00:00:02  69kN
>21.Rhg1 Rfc8
>  +-  (1.66)   depth: 6/21   00:00:04  126kN
>21.Rhg1 Rfc8 22.Bh1 Kf7
>  +-  (1.66)   depth: 6/23   00:00:05  163kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.b3 Rc8 24.Qc5 Rcb8
>  +-  (1.79)   depth: 7/23   00:00:22  708kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4
>  +-  (1.54)   depth: 8/25   00:00:49  1640kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.Bh3 Rc4 24.Rd7 Qxd7 25.Qxc4 Qf7 26.Qc3 Bxa2+ 27.Kc2
>  ±  (1.35)   depth: 8/27   00:01:13  2493kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4
>  ±  (1.10)   depth: 9/27   00:04:46  9474kN
>21.Rhg1 Nb4 22.Bxb4 Rxb4 23.Bf1 Rc4 24.Qxc4 Bxc4 25.Rd7 Qe5 26.Rgxg7+ Qxg7
>27.Rxg7+ Kxg7 28.b3 Bb5 29.c7
>  ±  (0.93)   depth: 9/29   00:06:17  12506kN
>
>(Young, 9/21/99)
>

Mark that's a great printout how is it done.?

I set mine up exactly as odell did and replayed the game:
I get the following differences.

What is strange is up to move 21. I get the same score at the same
depth after which i get.

21. h5 i get Rh3 (0.73/9 470) at depth 8 as you indicate i get Rhg1
Forcing acceptance of 21. h5 i continue.

22. Bxb4. Get this but get it at (0.00/9 324)

23. Kc1. I get Rh3 again  at your depth (0.00/8 99)
prior to which all it looked at was 23. b3.

24. Nc3. Get this at the same score (-1.30/9 74)

25. Rdg1. Get this but get it at (-1.33/9 81)
The rest is pretty much the same.

Seems to me that based on mine wanting to play 21. either Rhg8 or Rh3
it already notices the trouble that Nb4 is going to cause.
Again it wants to play Rh3 at move 23.

So to me the problem is with moves 21 and 23.

I let it search for move 21. h5 in watch mode looking at 5 moves
and after reaching depth 9 h5 is not listed.

I let it search for move 23. Kc1 in watch mode looking at 5 moves
and after reaching depth 8 Kc1 is fourth choice to:
Rh3, b3, Rhg1. add another move depth 9 then it has a problem
with Rh3 now third choice yet still considers Kc1 as fourth choice.

None of the solutions have to do with hash tables a computer rated
approx 790 points greater will win regardless. I also do not believe
hash has anything to do with 21. h5 as I have tried various hashmarks and
settings.

My only conclusion is odell has an axe to grind as to my best knowledge this
is the same person who post the player beating Hiarcs 6 a while back. If I am
wrong I apologize in advance.

Personally I think Hiarcs is fantastic, as good as any program on the market.
It is IMHO less aggressive than Fritz and CM6K but for my money the best all
around commercial program.










>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>
>>>>Event "Match game4"]
>>>>[Site "?"]
>>>>[Date "????.??.??"]
>>>>[Round "?"]
>>>>[White "Hiarcs7.32"]
>>>>[Black "O.hall"]
>>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>>[ECO "E61"]
>>>>[WhiteElo "2595"]
>>>>[BlackElo "1805"]
>>>>[Annotator "ohall"
>>>>[PlyCount "69"]
>>>>
>>>>{39936kB, super.ctg. PentiumII
>>>>} 1. d4 {0} 1... Nf6 {15} 2. c4 {0} 2... g6 {7}
>>>>3. g3 {0} 3... Bg7 {8} 4. Bg2 {0} 4... O-O {10} 5. Nc3 {0} 5... c6 {9} 6. Qb3 {
>>>>0.58/9 68} 6... d6 {77} 7. Nf3 {0.56/9 20} 7... Nbd7 {41} 8. Bg5 {0.49/9 131}
>>>>8... h6 {26} 9. Bd2 {0.49/9 80} 9... e5 {60} 10. dxe5 {0.42/9 71} 10... Nxe5 {
>>>>73} 11. Nxe5 {0.36/9 59} 11... dxe5 {28} 12. O-O-O {0.34/9 74} 12... Qc7 {40}
>>>>13. Na4 {-0.03/9 232} 13... b5 {73} 14. cxb5 {0.51/9 173} 14... Be6 {39} 15.
>>>>Qc2 {0.94/8 68} 15... Rac8 {50} 16. bxc6 {1.07/8 73} 16... Nd5 {43} 17. Kb1 {
>>>>1.51/9 112} 17... f5 {113} 18. h4 {1.67/8 99} 18... e4 {25} 19. g4 {1.07/9 325}
>>>>19... Rb8 {24} 20. gxf5 {1.90/8 249} 20... gxf5 {21} 21. h5 {0.90/8 511} 21...
>>>>Nb4 {63} 22. Bxb4 {-0.40/9 370} 22... Rxb4 {4} 23. Kc1 {-0.87/8 196} 23... Rc4
>>>>{206} 24. Nc3 {-1.30/9 80} 24... Qxc6 {9} 25. Rdg1 {-1.41/9 94} 25... Kh7 {124}
>>>>26. Rh3 {-0.95/8 62} 26... Bd4 {67} 27. Rd1 {-0.74/7 25} 27... Bxf2 {39} 28. e3
>>>>{-0.54/8 31} 28... f4 {114} 29. Qxf2 {0.00/9 0} 29... Rxc3+ {177} 30. bxc3 {
>>>>-0.04/9 0} 30... Qxc3+ {29} 31. Qc2 {1.59/8 37} 31... Qa1+ {74} 32. Kd2 {
>>>>2.14/8 37} 32... Rd8+ {28} 33. Ke1 {2.60/9 10} 33... Rxd1+ {36} 34. Qxd1 {
>>>>2.60/9 6} 34... Qxa2 {32} 35. Bxe4+ {6.56/8 37} 1-0



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.