Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:53:37 09/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2000 at 16:55:47, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On September 24, 2000 at 16:37:44, Eelco de Groot wrote:
>
>>On September 24, 2000 at 13:06:34, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>>
>>>On September 24, 2000 at 12:12:55, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello position #1 for the anti-gs2930 testset.
>>>>
>>>>In gs2930 giving away pawns gets awarded. In this
>>>>testset not giving away pawns is getting awarded
>>>>i would be happy to see results of gandalf and tiger on
>>>>next position, what does your program play here?
>>>>
>>>>[D]r4r2/1bpq1pbk/pnn1p1pp/1p6/3PP3/3BBN2/PP1QNPPP/2R2RK1 w - - d5?
>>>
>>>Gandalf has the following evaluation after almost 19 minutes:
>>>
>>>11 65 113200 161387412 a3 f5 Nf4 g5 exf5 exf5 Nh5 Bh8 b4 Kg8
>>>
>>>That is +0.65 at depth 11. It doesn't consider other moves except b4 and Bf4,
>>>but changes to a3 after 7.5 seconds and stays with it.
>>>
>>>Mogens.
>>
>>
>>I kinda remember somebody saying that we shouldn't be testing positions without
>>a best move given... We want to know what we should think, eh.. what our
>
>I give here that d5 is a complete nuts move. No program should *ever*
>consider playing it. I'm AMAZED that so many programs fall for this
>move the first few plies of their search! Says something about their
>penalty height.
>
>Basically this kind of positions is where you can improve your program
>with. Chess is and will remain a game where the weakest chain loses games
>for you. If you play d5 here then i'll beat you. Note this game came
>from a blitz game computer-me:
>
> 1. d4 (0:00) Nf6 (0:06)
> 2. c4 (0:00) g6 (0:02)
> 3. Nc3 (0:00) d5 (0:03)
> 4. Qb3 (0:00) dxc4 (0:52)
> 5. Qxc4 (0:00) Bg7 (0:07)
> 6. e4 (0:00) O-O (1:11)
> 7. Nf3 (0:00) a6 (0:02)
> 8. Bd3 (0:00) b5 (0:14)
> 9. Qb4 (0:42) Nc6 (0:11)
> 10. Qc5 (0:22) Bb7 (0:05)
> 11. Be3 (0:24) h6 (0:20)
> 12. Ne2 (0:30) Nd7 (0:04)
> 13. Qc3 (0:54) Nb6 (0:06)
> 14. O-O (0:11) e6 (0:29)
> 15. Qd2 (0:01) Kh7 (0:17)
> 16. Rac1 (0:39) Qd7 (0:08)
> 17. d5 (0:14) exd5 (0:17)
> 18. exd5 (0:33) Nxd5 (0:14)
> 19. Rfd1 (0:01) Rad8 (0:11)
> 20. Bc5 (0:10) Rfe8 (0:08)
> 21. Ng3 (0:01) Ne5 (0:21)
> 22. Nxe5 (0:15) Bxe5 (0:02)
> 23. Qc2 (0:09) c6 (0:20)
> 24. Be2 (0:15) Qe6 (0:03)
> 25. Bf3 (0:11) Nf4 (0:06)
> 26. b4 (0:10) Rxd1+ (0:02)
> 27. Rxd1 (0:05) Nd5 (0:05)
> 28. Re1 (0:08) Qc8 (0:06)
> 29. Qc1 (0:08) Bg7 (0:02)
> 30. Rxe8 (0:06) Qxe8 (0:01)
> 31. Ne4 (0:02) Bc8 (0:04)
> 32. Nd6 (0:05) Qe6 (0:01)
> 33. Qd1 (0:04) Bd7 (0:01)
> 34. Qd2 (0:04) Qe5 (0:02)
> 35. Nxf7 (0:04) Qa1+ (0:08)
> 36. Qd1 (0:04) Qxa2 (0:02)
> 37. Nd8 (0:01) Qa1 (0:03)
> 38. Qxa1 (0:04) Bxa1 (0:02)
> 39. Nf7 (0:00) Bc3 (0:05)
> 40. Bxd5 (0:07) cxd5 (0:00)
> 41. Kf1 (0:00) Bf5 (0:03)
> 42. Ke2 (0:07) Bc2 (0:02)
> 43. Bd6 (0:00) d4 (0:02)
> 44. Ne5 (0:00) Kg7 (0:03)
> 45. Bc5 (0:07) Kf6 (0:01)
> 46. f4 (0:00) Kf5 (0:02)
> 47. Kf3 (0:04) d3 (0:02)
> 48. g4+ (0:03) Ke6 (0:02)
> 49. Nxd3 (0:01) Bxd3 (0:01)
> 50. Ke3 (0:01) Bc2 (0:02)
> 51. h4 (0:01) Bf6 (0:03)
> 52. h5 (0:04) gxh5 (0:02)
> 53. gxh5 (0:01) Kf5 (0:01)
> 54. Bf8 (0:04) Bd1 (0:03)
> 55. Bxh6 (0:03) Bxh5 (0:01)
> 56. Bf8 (0:02) Bf7 (0:01)
> 57. Bd6 (0:04) Bc4 (0:01)
> 58. Kf3 (0:04) Bc3 (0:02)
> 59. Bc5 (0:03) Bd2 (0:03)
> 60. Bd6 (0:04) Bd5+ (0:01)
> 61. Ke2 (0:03) Bxf4 (0:02)
> 62. Be7 (0:01) Ke4 (0:02)
> 63. Bc5 (0:04) Bc4+ (0:01)
> 64. Ke1 (0:03) Kd3 (0:02)
> 65. Kf2 (0:03) Bd2 (0:02)
> 66. Kf3 (0:03) Bc3 (0:01)
> 67. Kf4 (0:03) Bd5 (0:02)
> 68. Bd6 (0:03) Kc4 (0:01)
> 69. Bc7 (0:02) Bxb4 (0:01)
> 70. Ke3 (0:02)
> {White resigns} 0-1
>
>>computers should be thinking for us! I get very fluctuating suggestions from Y2,
>>which is practically identical to q5t (which again is very much like Q3) but
>>with Attractiveness a little higher to 260. Eventually it wants to double its
>>rooks on the c-file and then continue with a3 in the 12 ply iteration. I'm not
>>much good with tactics, especially 1.a2-a4 pawn-sac I would never expect if I
>>had the Black pieces, don't know if that is justified.
>>
>>Tested with Celeron 500Mhz, Q5T scored 2722 GS2930 points. Those results on
>>Rebel Board.
>
>>Rebel Engine for ECTool. (c) Ed Schröder
>
>>Engine version : REBEL CENTURY 2
>>Rebel personality : Y2.eng
>>Opening book file : REBEL.MVS
>>Hash table size : 40 MB
>>Analysis mode : Analyzing next move
>>Refresh interval : 500 ms
>>
>>Game begin
>>
>>
>>00:00 03.04 1.57 1.d5 Ne7 2.Bf4 exd5 3.Rxc7
>>00:00 04.06 0.95 1.Rfd1 Kg8 2.Ne5 Bxe5 3.dxe5
>>00:01 05.01 0.80 1.Bf4 Rad8 2.Rcd1 g5 3.Be3
>>00:02 05.07 0.87 1.Nh4 Rad8 2.Rfe1 e5 3.d5
>>00:03 06.02 0.77 1.Rfd1 Rad8 2.Nh4 Rfe8 3.Bc2 Kg8
>>00:04 06.03 0.77 1.d5
>>00:06 06.16 0.82 1.Nf4 e5 2.Nxe5 Nxe5 3.dxe5 Bxe5 4.Rfd1 g5 5.Ne2
>>00:08 07.00 0.72 1.Nf4 e5 2.dxe5 Nxe5 3.Rfd1 Nxd3 4.Qxd3 Qxd3 5.Nxd3 Bxe4
>>6.Rxc7
>>00:09 07.01 0.77 1.Rfd1 Rad8 2.Bf4 g5 3.Be3 e5 4.d5
>>00:11 07.02 0.78 1.Nh4 Rad8 2.b3 Kg8 3.Rfe1 e5 4.Nf3
>>00:13 07.04 0.78 1.d5
>>00:14 07.04 0.89 1.d5 exd5 2.Bxb6 cxb6 3.exd5 Ne5 4.Be4 Nc4 5.Qd3 Bxb2
>>00:34 08.00 0.75 1.d5 exd5 2.Bxb6 cxb6 3.exd5 Ne5 4.Nxe5 Bxe5 5.Be4 f5 6.f4
>>Bxb2 7.Qxb2
>>01:08 08.18 0.80 1.Rc5 f5 2.Rfc1 Na4 3.R5c2 Rad8 4.Bf4 fxe4 5.Bxe4
>>01:29 09.00 0.97 1.Rc5 Rad8 2.Rfc1 Rfe8 3.b3 Qd6 4.a3 e5 5.d5
>>01:33 09.01 0.97 1.d5
>
>Amazing that even at 9 ply d5?? gets considered. Look at the score 0.97
>something is wrong in the evaluation there, d5 gives away a pawn!
>
>>02:16 09.20 1.00 1.Rc2 Rad8 2.Rfc1 Rfe8 3.a3 Qd6 4.b4 e5 5.d5
>>03:25 10.00 0.86 1.Rc2 f5 2.Rfc1 Rac8 3.Nf4 Qd6 4.d5
>>04:01 10.01 0.93 1.Rc5 Rad8 2.b3 Rfe8 3.Rfc1 Qd6 4.R1c2 Nd7 5.Bf4 e5
>>06:48 10.32 0.98 1.a4 Nxa4 2.b3 Nb6 3.d5 Nxd5 4.exd5 Qxd5 5.Bc2 Qxd2 6.Nxd2
>>Rad8
>
>again the pawnsack in the mainline
>
>>08:24 11.00 0.31 1.a4 Nxa4 2.b3 Nb6 3.Rfd1 f5 4.Nf4 Rae8 5.d5 exd5 6.Bxb6
>>cxb6
>
>d5 in mainline here is less interesting as f5 is also played, so it doesn't
>say much here.
>
>>12:39 11.01 1.02 1.Rc5 Rfd8 2.Rfc1 Qe8 3.Qc2 Nb4 4.Qb1 Nc6 5.Bf4 Na4
>>26:37 12.00 1.06 1.Rc5 Rfd8 2.Rfc1 Qe8 3.a3 Bf8 4.R5c2 f6 5.Nh4 Kg8
>
>So rebel is giving away pawns way too quick!
It is not Rebel personality for playing games but the Y2 personality that is
used by the poster for test positions.
I am not surprised that it does tactical errors because this personality is
designed to do tactical errors in order to solve more test positions.
The default personality is probably better.
Uri
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.