Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is it possible to build an engine at 2600 strength in 3 to 4 weeks

Author: David Rientjes

Date: 09:40:31 10/05/01

Go up one level in this thread


On October 05, 2001 at 03:17:36, derrick gatewood wrote:

>Well,  the computer account that is in question there is Compablanca.  I just
>really hate people taking credit for other people's programs.  To me,  this is
>the same as if you cheated using a program to get a high rating to make yourself
>look good in the eyes of other chess players.

This will be my only post to this message forum and I will not check on the
acceptance of this message or any comments made in response.

I am the author of Compablanca, the chess engine which the original poster, Mr.
Gatewood, is speaking about.  Compablanca runs on chess.net and currently has a
2607 blitz rating; it has played 447 blitz games so you can conclude yourself
whether or not you believe the rating to be accurate.  Compablanca's formula is
setup to play humans only in lightning, blitz, standard, or wild matches with
certain time controls placed on them (for example, an 18 minute time limit for
standard).  There are rating requirements in place which restrict users that
will not benefit its rating from playing long games against it -- a requirement
most computer maintainers place on their computers.  When computers play against
much lower rated players, they have the increased risk of disconnecting during
the match and often "forfeiting" the match by chess.net's disconnect policy.
The blitz rating restriction is for users rated 2150 and above.  This means five
or six players not involved in tournaments, open to accepting matches, and
accepting of match requests from computers, have the opportunity to play it at
any given time.  There are hundreds of users who will pass Compablanca's
formula.

Compablanca is currently in v1.2.  It was started about five or six weeks ago by
myself.  To be completely honest with everyone here, the most difficult part was
not the chess logic itself, but rather the socket code which connects it to the
chess.net server and keeps it connected even when excessively idle (as it waits
for matches during slow times).  I was lucky to have written an Internet Relay
Chat bot a few years ago for the Undernet IRC network (www.undernet.org) in
which I could borrow the socket code that helped out tremendously.

I often tell people on chess.net that Compablanca does not have "books" like
other computers do.  Compablanca has a set number of openings which it follows
but usually after move 10 (or whenever an opponent deverts from an opening),
it's on its own.  Compablanca uses a list of priorities which it attempts to
maintain which start as follows:

 1. prevent a checkmate or a positional advantage in which a checkmate may
become possible;
 2. exploit a checkmate or a positional advantage on the opponent and disregard
material advantage possibilites;

Following that, there are a list of priorities for positional advantages,
material advantages, promoting of pawns, king usage, etc.  The list of
priorities is obviously not discussed by myself since that would open
Compablanca up to be exploited if someone were to know this list.  There have
been several human users who have had material advantage of three or four pawns
against it and have even gone on to checkmate it (a national master comes to
mind who checkmated it in less than 40 moves).  Compablanca is often vulnerable
when playing someone who is capable of making very precise and important moves
in comparison to other players who can make one or two slight move errors which
open Compablanca's FOA (field of attack) and allows him to eventually go on to
win.  Compablanca has not only been beaten in standard matches, but also in wild
matches, and pawns only matches (where a computer would normally dominate).

Compablanca is not open to matches from other computers since it would obviously
suffer great vulnerability.  Compablanca was created within the past five or six
weeks (the first week being the most work-filled) by a single person.  Other
engines like Crafty, Fritz, etc. (engines I have very little experience with
myself) have been worked on for years by a team of people.  The disadvantage to
Compablanca is evident.

My hope for Compablanca was that it would provide the users of chess.net with a
powerful engine in which they may play against to improve their chess games.
Rating restrictions are a new thing (about a week old) to prevent inevitable
problems in which Compablanca would forfeit for lagging too much or
disconnecting.  Up to last week, all users were open to play against it.

Again, my goal is not to promote myself as a great programmer or a great chess
player by any means.  My goal is to provide good chess players with a tool to
possibly improve their chess games.  I don't care to spend my time promoting it
or bragging about its successes.

Remember, I will not be back to this message board to view the responses to this
message or check-up on future debates about Compablanca (which I whole-heartedly
welcome) or any other chess engine.  I was only invited here once by the
original author and was told to "defend myself".  I don't believe I need to
defend myself in any way since very few people know I wrote the engine and
everyone else seems to enjoy playing against it more than debating whether a
single person actually wrote it or not.

David Rientjes



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.