Author: John Merlino
Date: 19:22:38 10/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2001 at 19:21:54, Steven J. Brann wrote:
>On October 23, 2001 at 14:51:52, John Merlino wrote:
>
>>On October 23, 2001 at 13:12:38, Andrew Williams wrote:
>>
>>>Hi,
>>>
>>>My program lost this game against a crafty clone on ICC recently:
>>>
>>>[Event "ICS rated blitz match"]
>>>[Site "204.178.125.65"]
>>>[Date "2001.10.21"]
>>>[Round "-"]
>>>[White "MoonShot"]
>>>[Black "PostModernist"]
>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>[WhiteElo "2859"]
>>>[BlackElo "2772"]
>>>[TimeControl "600+2"]
>>>
>>>1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 c6 3. Nc3 e6 4. e4 Bb4 5. Bd3 d5 6. e5 dxc4 7. Bxc4 Nd5 8.
>>>Ne2 b6 9. O-O O-O 10. Qd3 Be7 11. Bd2 Bb7 12. Qg3 Kh8 13. Ne4 Ba6 14. Rac1
>>>Bxc4 15. Rxc4 Qd7 16. Bg5 Na6 17. Bxe7 Nxe7 18. Nd6 Nc7 19. Rfc1 Rad8 20.
>>>Qf3 Ne8 21. Ne4 Kg8 22. Qh3 a5 23. a4 Nc7 24. Qg4 Kh8 25. Qh5 Kg8 26. R1c3
>>>Qd5 27. Nf6+ gxf6 28. Rg3+ Kh8 29. Qh6 Ng6 30. Rh3
>>>{PostModernist resigns} 1-0
>>>
>>>
>>>The move 27.Nf6+ wins everything immediately. MoonShot (crafty 18.12
>>>on a K7 1.33GHz) found that in 14 seconds (albeit with hash-tables
>>>already full). With some fiddling about with null move rules, PM can
>>>find it in 37 seconds from a "standing start" (K7 1.2GHz). I'd be
>>>interested to know how other programs do on this.
>>>
>>>[D]3r1rk1/2n1nppp/1pp1p3/p2qP2Q/P1RPN3/2R5/1P2NPPP/6K1 w - - bm Nf6
>>>
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>
>>>Andrew
>>
>>Chessmaster 2003 (yep, a pre-alpha version) finds Nf6+ in 1 second on my
>>PIII-600:
>>
>>Time Depth Score Positions Moves
>>0:00 1/3 -0.53 1825 1.Qh4 Ng6 2.Qg4 Nxe5 3.Nf6+ Kh8
>> 4.Nxd5 Nxg4
>>0:00 1/3 -0.51 2251 1.Qf3 Qxe5 2.Re3
>>0:00 1/3 -0.40 2563 1.Qg4 Qxe5 2.Re3
>>0:00 1/3 0.15 3128 1.Ng5 h6 2.Nf4 Qd7
>>0:00 1/3 0.30 3599 1.Nd2 c5 2.Rf3 Ng6
>>0:00 1/4 0.58 10761 1.Nd2 c5 2.Rh3 h6 3.Rf3
>>0:00 2/5 0.47 28873 1.Nd2 c5 2.Rh3 h6 3.Qg4 Nf5
>>0:01 2/5 4.97 61949 1.Nf6+ gxf6 2.Rg3+ Ng6 3.Rh3 Nh4
>> 4.Qxh4 Rfe8 5.exf6 Qf5 6.Qg3+ Qg6
>> 7.Qxc7
>>0:02 2/6 11.24 162916 1.Nf6+ gxf6 2.Rg3+ Kh8 3.Qh6 Ng6
>> 4.Rh3 Qxg2+ 5.Kxg2 Nf4+ 6.Nxf4
>> Rg8+ 7.Rg3 Ne8 8.Rxc6 fxe5 9.Rxg8+
>> Kxg8 10.dxe5
>>0:06 3/7 13.41 514809 1.Nf6+ gxf6 2.Rg3+ Ng6 3.Rh3 Nh4
>> 4.Qxh4 Qe4 5.Qxe4 f5 6.Qh4 h6 7.Qxh6
>>0:17 3/8 16.47 1697869 1.Nf6+ gxf6 2.Rg3+ Kh8 3.Qh6 Ng6
>> 4.Rh3 Qxg2+ 5.Kxg2 Nf4+ 6.Nxf4
>> Rg8+ 7.Kf1 Rg7 8.exf6 Rdg8 9.fxg7+
>> Rxg7 10.Rxc6
>>
>>jm
>
>As we have the opportunity, let's compare CM8000 head to head with the alpha
>version CM2003.
>
>My custom personality finds Nf6+ in less than a second. PIII 933 64MB hash.
>
>Time Depth Score Positions Moves
>0:00 1/5 0.56 28137 1. Nd2 c5 2. Rh3 h6 3. Qg4 Nf5
> 4. Rb3
>0:00 1/5 5.75 46065 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Ng6 3. Rh3
> Nh4 4. Qxh4 Rfe8 5. exf6 Qf5 6.
> Qg3+ Qg6 7. Qxc7
>0:01 1/6 13.14 100047 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Qxg2+ 5. Kxg2 Nf4+ 6.
> Nxf4 Rg8+ 7. Rg3 Ne8 8. Rxc6 Rxd4
> 9. Rxe6
>0:01 1/7 15.51 217539 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Ng6 3. Rh3
> Nh4 4. Qxh4 Qe4 5. Qxe4 f5 6. Qh4
> h6 7. Qxh6
>0:03 1/8 19.18 549334 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Qxg2+ 5. Kxg2 Nf4+ 6.
> Nxf4 Rg8+ 7. Kf1 Rg7 8. exf6 Rdg8
> 9. fxg7+ Rxg7 10. Rxc6
>0:09 1/9 19.90 1573067 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Qxg2+ 5. Kxg2 Nf4+ 6.
> Nxf4 Rg8+ 7. Kf1 Rg7 8. exf6 Rdg8
> 9. fxg7+ Rxg7 10. Rxc6 Ne8 11.
> Rxb6
>0:27 1/10 25.17 4644735 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Qxg2+ 5. Kxg2 Nh4+ 6.
> Rxh4 Rg8+ 7. Kf1 Rg7 8. exf6 Rdg8
> 9. fxg7+ Rxg7 10. Rxc6 Ne8 11.
> Rc8 Rg1+ 12. Kxg1
>1:24 1/11 29.43 14837127 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Qxg2+ 5. Kxg2 Nh4+ 6.
> Rxh4 Rg8+ 7. Kf1 Rg7 8. exf6 Rdg8
> 9. fxg7+ Rxg7 10. Rxc6 Kg8 11.
> Rxc7 Kf8 12. Rg4 Ke8 13. Rxg7
>3:36 1/12 Mate15 38472587 1. Nf6+ gxf6 2. Rg3+ Kh8 3. Qh6
> Ng6 4. Rh3 Nh4 5. Qxf6+ Kg8 6.
> Rxh4 Rfe8 7. Qh6 Qe4 8. Rxe4 f5
> 9. exf6ep Re7 10. fxe7 Rc8 11.
> Rg4+ Kf7 12. Qxh7+ Ke8 13. Rg8+
> Kd7 14. e8=Q+ Kd6 15. Qxc6#
>
>Steve
I have no problem comparing older and newer versions, as long as it is made
clear that I am using the DEFAULT personality, and that I am using a PRE-ALPHA
build, which has any number of bugs and probably a great lack of optimization.
Therefore, it might be better to test the new version against the DEFAULT old
version (with perhaps just increasing the hash table size to improve overall
speed).
jm
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.