Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 04:17:44 12/15/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 14, 1999 at 20:40:40, Howard Exner wrote: >On December 14, 1999 at 17:29:16, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On December 14, 1999 at 17:12:13, John Warfield wrote: >> >>>On December 13, 1999 at 05:42:55, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>>Subject: Re: SSDF ratings are 100% accurate >>>> >>>>>Posted by John Warfield on December 12, 1999 at 20:36:17: >>>> >>>>>>>Now I am beginning to see that SSDF ratings do not reflect performance against >>>>>>>humans period. Going back to my example, program B could actually be weaker >>>>>>>than program A against GMs, even though it is 50 points stronger in SSDF comp >>>>>>>vs. com testing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I guess this is what Ed Schroder has been saying all along about Rebel. I >>>>>>>need to think about this for a while. >>>>>> >>>>>>The MAIN difference I noticed: in comp-comp both programs (in many cases) >>>>>>can afford (multiple) small to big positional mistakes. Try this against >>>>>>a GM, one little mistake and you lose. The REBEL-HOFFMAN game was a >>>>>>perfect example of this. >>>>>> >>>>>>Ed >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The rebel hoffman game was lost because rebel crashed remember? >>>> >>>>Of course I remember. But in the meantime I have changed my mind. Rebel due >>>>to the hardware problems used about 50-60% of its time also 2 horrible moves >>>>were played (one with a +2.xx) score that couldn't be reproduced. This made me >>>>decide the game was worthless. >>>> >>>>But after going through the game again and again my conclusion is different now. >>>>Rebel didn't understand the opening, played a few inferior moves and technically >>>>the game was over after move 18. Note that Rebel was in book till move 15! >>>> >>>>I think that's all there is to say about this game. The hardware problems came >>>>after the 2 inferior moves (16.Qc1 and 18.a4) and GM Hoffman did not let Rebel >>>>go. In comp-comp however you still would have good chances to win the game >>>>(note that after 18.a4 Rebel is still a pawn up) as the opening was very >>>>strategic by nature an area computers are still weak. >>>> >>>>Just try any chess program that gives you a positive score for black after 18.a4 >>>>and if it does buy it by all means :-) >>>> >>>>Or take 2 (or more) good chess programs and let them continue after 18.a4 and >>>>I am pretty sure white's total game score will be over 50%. >>>> >>>>This is what I got as a comment from GM Hoffman about the game: >>>> >>>>[ begin ] >>>> >>>>I think it was a very interesting game for black,with 15... Rb7 an interesting >>>>novelty.16. Qc1 means that Rebel doesn't understand the position (16.Rc1 >>>>was normal plan). >>>> >>>>I think it is very hard to a computer to know the difference between to have >>>>material plus and the strategical compensation for the pawn. That's because >>>>I choice the Volga Gambit. That you must think how to improve for a high level >>>>program. >>>> >>>>[ end ] >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>Rebel was caught on a weak point of its opening book. Very clever and an >>>>instructive experience. >>> >>> >>> Ok well that's be clear about this issue Ed, then it was the Rebel book that >>>lost the game, and not the Rebel Engine!! Whoever created the Rebel MVS needs >>>some chastisement! Just Joking, I realize that a grandmaster will always find >>>some king of whole in a opening book, but still somehow I don't want to blame >>>rebel for the lost. >> >>Disagree. Rebel did not understand the opening played 2 inferior moves >>and lost because of that. The book-line itself was ok. I assume not >>every GM plays the King Gambit perfectly and may got caught because of >>that. >> >>Ed > >Even with Rebel not understanding the opening plus the hardware failures >I often wondered if at move 35 Rebel could have played more actively. Instead of >the timid Kh1 perhaps Qg4 would have been played by a healthy Rebel. This kind >of move makes black's choice of a follow up plan more difficult than the actual >game where Hoffman transfered his rook via b8 to h8. Did Hoffman comment on a >possible Qg4 here? > >8/2n1pk2/3p1pp1/2pP4/Pr1qP3/2N4P/1P2QRK1/8 w - - id Rebel Century - GM A. >Hoffman; The special Rebel Engine for ECTool after some time also switches to 35. Kh1 though. I hope somebody can translate GM Hoffman's analysis! I was wondering if after 35.Qg4 Black might try a maneuver like Qd3-Qb1 to try to capture the pawn on b2? Rebel Engine for ECTool. (c) Ed Schröder Engine version : REBEL 9/10 Hash table size : 4 Mb Analysis mode : Analyzing next move Refresh interval : 1000 ms Game begin 00:00 01.17 0.44 Kg2-h2 00:02 03.00 0.00 Kg2-h2 Qd4-e5+ Kh2-g2 Qe5-d4 00:02 03.03 0.36 a4-a5 c5-c4 Qe2-g4 00:04 03.05 0.48 Qe2-g4 e7-e6 d5xe6+ Nc7xe6 00:06 04.00 0.52 Qe2-g4 Qd4-e3 Qg4-c8 Nc7-e8 Kg2-g1 00:11 05.00 0.50 Qe2-g4 f6-f5 Qg4-g3 Rb4xa4 e4xf5 00:22 06.00 0.20 Qe2-g4 e7-e6 d5xe6+ Nc7xe6 Kg2-f1 Ne6-g5 01:32 07.00 0.24 Qe2-g4 e7-e6 d5xe6+ Nc7xe6 a4-a5 c5-c4 Kg2-f1 02:07 07.02 0.34 Kg2-h1 Kf7-g7 Rf2-g2 Qd4-c4 Qe2-g4 Qc4-f1+ Rg2-g1 03:34 08.00 0.46 Kg2-h1 Rb4-b8 Rf2-g2 Rb8-g8 Qe2-g4 Qd4-e3 Nc3-b5 05:36 09.00 0.46 Kg2-h1 Rb4-b8 Rf2-g2 Rb8-g8 Qe2-g4 Qd4-e3 Nc3-b5 11:28 10.00 0.32 Kg2-h1 Qd4-e5 Qe2-g4 f6-f5 Qg4-h4 Qe5-f6 Qh4-h6 21:15 10.01 0.35 Qe2-g4 Qd4-e5 Qg4-c8 Qe5-g5+ Kg2-h2 Qg5-e3 Rf2-c2 02:54 11.00 0.38 Qe2-g4 c5-c4 Qg4-h4 f6-f5 Rf2-e2 Qd4-g7 e4xf5 03:54 12.00 0.23 Qe2-g4 Qd4-e3 Qg4-h4 Kf7-g7 Kg2-h2 Qe3-h6 Qh4xh6+ 44:19 12.01 0.29 Kg2-h1 Rb4-b8 Rf2-g2 Rb8-h8 Qe2-g4 g6-g5 Qg4-f3 We just received the first snow of the (climatological) year here! Are we going to have a White Christmas? (My turn to be a little chauvinistic :)) Regards, Everybody Eelco
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.