Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 05:40:54 11/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2001 at 04:51:32, Uri Blass wrote:
>On November 10, 2001 at 02:29:10, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 10, 2001 at 02:01:07, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On November 09, 2001 at 23:26:30, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 09, 2001 at 20:28:45, Peter Berger wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 09, 2001 at 19:56:34, Thomas Mayer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Yet again , a late night post :=)
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>in winboard forum one has posted some games of Palm Tiger against not so strong
>>>>>>winboard engines.
>>>>>
>>>>>"One" answers :)
>>>>>
>>>>>>Next is interesting:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[Event "Palm Tiger vs. WinBoard"]
>>>>>>[Site "Athlon 1333 vs. Palm Vx"]
>>>>>>[Date "2001.11.08"]
>>>>>>[Round "-"]
>>>>>>[White "Chess Tiger 14.6"]
>>>>>>[Black "Grizzly 1.31"]
>>>>>>[Result "0-1"]
>>>>>>[TimeControl "900"]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Bxc6 dxc6 5. d4 exd4 6. Qxd4 Bg4 7. Qxd8+
>>>>>>Rxd8 8. Nc3 Bb4 9. Bg5 Bxc3+ 10. bxc3 f6 11. Bf4 Bxf3 12. gxf3 Rd7 13. h4
>>>>>>Ne7 14. h5 b6 15. Rd1 Nc8 16. Rxd7 Kxd7 17. Rg1 Rg8 18. Ke2 Nd6 19. Bh6 g5
>>>>>>20. hxg6 hxg6 21. Bf4 g5 22. Kd3 Rd8 23. Bh2 Nb5 24. f4 Kc8+ 25. Ke3 gxf4+
>>>>>>26. Bxf4 Nxc3 27. Rg7 Rd7 28. Rg8+ Kb7 29. f3 Nxa2 30. Rf8 Nb4 31. c4 Nc2+
>>>>>>32. Ke2 f5 33. exf5 b5 34. cxb5 cxb5 35. f6 Nd4+ 36. Ke3 Ne6 37. Re8 Nxf4
>>>>>>38. Kxf4 b4 39. Re4 a5 40. Re5 Kb6 41. Re7 Rd8 42. f7 Rf8 43. Kf5 b3 44.
>>>>>>Kf6 b2 45. Re1 a4 46. Ke7 Rxf7+ 47. Kxf7 a3 48. Rb1 c5 49. f4 c4 50. f5 c3
>>>>>>51. Re1 c2 52. Re6+ Kc5 53. Re5+ Kd4 54. Ra5 c1=Q 55. Rxa3 b1=Q 56. Ra4+
>>>>>>Ke3 57. Ra7 Qxf5+ 58. Kg7 Qc3+ 59. Kg8 Qcc8+ 60. Kg7 Qcf8#
>>>>>>{Black mates} 0-1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[Event "Palm Tiger vs. WinBoard"]
>>>>>>[Site "Athlon 1333 vs. Palm Vx"]
>>>>>>[Date "2001.11.08"]
>>>>>>[Round "-"]
>>>>>>[White "Grizzly 1.31"]
>>>>>>[Black "Chess Tiger 14.6"]
>>>>>>[Result "1-0"]
>>>>>>[TimeControl "900"]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. f4 d5 2. Nf3 Bg4 3. g3 Bxf3 4. exf3 e6 5. Ke2 d4 6. Bg2 d3+ 7. cxd3 Nc6
>>>>>>8. Re1 Qd7 9. Kf1 Nb4 10. d4 Nd3 11. Re3 Qxd4 12. Qc2 Nxc1 13. Qxc1 Nf6 14.
>>>>>>Nc3 O-O-O 15. Nb5 Qd7 16. a4 a6 17. Nxc7 Kb8 18. Nxa6+ bxa6 19. Qc4 Qc8 20.
>>>>>>Rc1 Qxc4+ 21. Rxc4 Nd5 22. Rb3+ Ka7 23. f5 Bd6 24. f4 Rc8 25. Rxc8 Rxc8 26.
>>>>>>Rd3 Rc1+ 27. Ke2 Be7 28. fxe6 fxe6 29. f5 Nc7 30. Rd7 Bb4 31. fxe6 Rc5 32.
>>>>>>d4 Rc2+ 33. Kd3 Rd2+ 34. Ke3 Kb6 35. e7 Rxg2 36. Rxc7 Bxe7 37. Rxe7 Rxb2
>>>>>>38. h4 Rb3+ 39. Kf2 Ra3 40. Rxg7 Rxa4 41. Ke3 h5 42. Rg5 Ra3+ 43. Kf4 Rd3
>>>>>>44. d5 a5 45. Ke4 Rb3 46. d6 a4 47. Rd5 Rxg3 48. d7 Rg4+ 49. Kf5 Rg8 50.
>>>>>>d8=Q+ Rxd8 51. Rxd8 Kc7 52. Ra8 Kc6 53. Rxa4 Kb5 54. Ra8 Kc6 55. Rh8 Kd5
>>>>>>56. Rxh5 Kd4 57. Rg5 Kd5 58. h5 Kc4 59. h6 Kb3 60. h7 Ka2 61. Rg3 Ka1 62.
>>>>>>h8=Q+ Kb1 63. Rg2 Kc1 64. Qa1#
>>>>>>{White mates} 1-0
>>>>>>
>>>>>>[Event "Palm Tiger vs. WinBoard"]
>>>>>>[Site "Athlon 1333 vs. Palm Vx"]
>>>>>>[Date "2001.11.08"]
>>>>>>[Round "-"]
>>>>>>[White "Chess Tiger 14.6"]
>>>>>>[Black "Grizzly 1.31"]
>>>>>>[Result "0-1"]
>>>>>>[TimeControl "900"]
>>>>>>
>>>>>>1. d4 d5 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 dxc4 4. e3 b5 5. Nc3 Bb4 6. a3 Bxc3+ 7. bxc3 Nf6
>>>>>>8. Ne5 O-O 9. a4 c6 10. Qf3 Qd5 11. Ba3 Qxf3 12. gxf3 Re8 13. Bd6 a6 14.
>>>>>>Bxb8 Rxb8 15. Nxc6 Rb6 16. axb5 axb5 17. Nb4 Nd5 18. Nxd5 exd5 19. f4 b4
>>>>>>20. cxb4 Rxb4 21. Bg2 Bb7 22. O-O Ra8 23. Rab1 Rxb1 24. Rxb1 c3 25. Rxb7 c2
>>>>>>26. Rc7 Ra1+ 27. Bf1 c1=Q 28. Rxc1 Rxc1 29. Kg2 f5 30. Bb5 Kf7 31. Kf3 Ke6
>>>>>>32. Be8 Rh1 33. Kg2 Rb1 34. Kf3 g6 35. h3 Rb4 36. Bc6 Kd6 37. Be8 Rb8 38.
>>>>>>Ba4 Rb1 39. Be8 Rh1 40. Kg2 Rc1 41. Kg3 Ke7 42. Bb5 Rg1+ 43. Kf3 Ke6 44.
>>>>>>Bc6 Rh1 45. Kg3 Rc1 46. Bb7 Rg1+ 47. Kf3 Kd6 48. Ba6 Rh1 49. Kg3 Ra1 50.
>>>>>>Bb7 h6 51. Kf3 Ra5 52. Bc8 Ra7 53. Kg3 Kc6 54. Be6 Rc7 55. e4 dxe4 56. Kh4
>>>>>>Kd6 57. Bb3 Ke7 58. Bg8 Rc3 59. d5 Kf6 60. f3 Rxf3 61. Be6 g5+ 62. fxg5+
>>>>>>hxg5+ 63. Kh5 Rxh3#
>>>>>>{Black mates} 0-1
>>>>>>
>>>>>>In most rating lists, Grizzly is around 1800-1900 - this new version is a little
>>>>>>bit stronger, but I doubt that it is over 2000. Does this mean that Chess Tiger
>>>>>>on Palm is also clearly under 2000 ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Both, the second and the third game were quite interesting and very close.
>>>>>Grizzly is no weaky - I was very much impressed by the Tiger performance here !
>>>>>Still Grizzly won ; is Zephyr weak ? Or Blikskottel ? What was their score ? I
>>>>>wanted to have a little fun ; beating the Tiger on the 1000* hardware shows that
>>>>>there has been some "magic" barrier passed - only Grizzly succeeded.
>>>>>
>>>>>Or is this another point where
>>>>>>engine-engine matches are very different to engine - human matches ? Anyway, I
>>>>>>would like to see some more matches of Chess Tiger on Palm against the lower
>>>>>>edge of the winboard-engines... And besides that, frequently here are some
>>>>>>postings of games ChessTiger on Palm against some well known dedicated chess
>>>>>>computers which are listed on the SSDF-list. ChessTiger wins many games, does
>>>>>>that mean that those old irons are still overestimated on the SSDF-list. Or
>>>>>>should we finally stop to compare SSDF-ELO with human ELO ? (Which I say for a
>>>>>>long time now - there is no real comparrison... The 100 ELO-penalty for the hole
>>>>>>list was somehow irregular because the old iron often have showed there strength
>>>>>>against humans, so why decrease them 100 ELOs ?)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Greets, Thomas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>P.S.: I think a solution for the SSDF would be a completely different rating.
>>>>>>Just stop to make them compareable with human rating and set a starting level
>>>>>>for the lowest listed engine of e.g. 0 or e.g. 10000 so just the numbers are
>>>>>>very different to FIDE-ELO and noone would compare anymore.
>>>>>
>>>>>Well - it's too early for any conclusion IMHO . My personal guess is that the
>>>>>Palm Tiger is about the same strength as the Novag Diamond/Sapphire. When it is
>>>>>about the WinBoard engines being able to beat the Tiger even if on some insane
>>>>>Athlon 1300++ against some miserable Palm Vx - seems to be some _real_ challenge
>>>>>still , huh ?
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>pete
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I think another real challenge is to write a 1800 elo program for the Athlon
>>>>1333.
>>>>
>>>>I think that by just using plain vanilla brute force alpha beta without
>>>>transposition table nor null move and a static piece square table you are
>>>>already above 1800 elo. Easily.
>>>>
>>>>Actually the Sargon III program does just that, and on an Athlon it must be well
>>>>over 2100 elo (maybe 2200).
>>>
>>>
>>>I doubt it
>>>Do you say that SargonIII does not evaluate passed pawns?(you cannot evaluate
>>>passed pawns only by piece square table evaluation).
>>>
>>>
>>>I believe that if you use only alpha beta without evaluation that has only
>>>material and piece square table and use no qsearch then you can get program that
>>>is even weaker than 1800 on Athlon1333.
>>>
>>>Uri
>>
>>
>>
>>Maybe. But just following the basic published algorithms of alphabeta+QSearch
>>brings you well over 1800 in no time.
>>
>>I don't think Sargon III had any second order evaluation of passed pawns.
>>
>>And I know you can go easily above 1800 elo with a piece square table only
>>evaluation. I know it sounds surprising, but that tells something about the
>>"essence" of chess.
>
>It may be interesting if you can do it against humans who know that the program
>have only piece square table but do not have the program or the opening book or
>only against computers.
>
>Uri
It does not make a big difference.
Look at the SSDF list. There are programs like the early Fidelity computers by
the Spracklens that were basically doing this. On 6502 (very slow processor),
they already have a 1700 or even 1800 SSDF elo rating. And this rating has been
proved to be correct against human players (it was even higher, because we
should keep in mind that the SSDF has subtracted 100 points to the bottom of the
list as well).
Christophe
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.