Author: Mark Young
Date: 02:30:16 07/27/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 1998 at 05:19:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 26, 1998 at 21:04:02, Mark Young wrote: > > > >to make this simple, tell me your fics handle. I will make a quick test when >I hit the office, but the plan will be to use the xboard trick that will only >accept matches from one player, your handle. I'll make the formula "1" so >you can pick the time control and rated/unrated. I don't know how to set up >40/2 however, so will leave the time control choice to you... > >I will be at my office in an hour or two. if you can get me your handle on >fics, I'll try to have this set up right after I arrive. number of games is >up to you, but I assume you will want to spread this over multiple days... > > My Fics handle is Wheeler. I don't think you can set up 40/2 time controls so I will set it up as game 3 hrs. with 10 sec incs. I will check Fics to see when you have it set up. I will do 6 games. I will e-mail my name to you crafty account on fics. > > > >>On July 26, 1998 at 13:58:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On July 26, 1998 at 09:53:42, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>On July 26, 1998 at 09:18:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 26, 1998 at 08:28:08, Shaun Graham wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 25, 1998 at 19:55:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 25, 1998 at 11:04:40, Shaun Graham wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"At 40/2 they are not GM yet, but they are pretty close, and if the human GM >>>>>>>>doesn't take care, he can get rolled up pretty badly, since the computer is >>>>>>>>going to be quite attentive toward the least tactical mistake, where another >>>>>>>>human might miss it entirely. The better they (the programs) get, the harder >>>>>>>>it will be to attract human GM players to play them." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>(A quote from Robert Hyatt) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He says "pretty close" now, that's not what my memory recalls him saying. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Depends on your definition of "pretty close". I have said "FIDE 2400" for quite >>>>>>>a while now. Which is still a ways from the minimum 2500 needed for a GM title. >>>>>> >>>>>> " In the 2 slow games Anand didn t show any overwhelming >>>>>>superiority, as he would have against a 2400 player. I have no doubt about Anand >>>>>>being stronger than Rebel 10, but not by 400 Elo points. During 1997 and 1998, >>>>>>Anand drew 48 games playing white. The lowest ranked opponent in these games was >>>>>>Ljubojevic with 2565. Then Piket with 2575 and Hübner with 2580. All others were >>>>>>rated 2630 or higher. Of course, all well known GMs. I don t say this as proof >>>>>>of Rebel 10 being a GM, but overall as strong indications that its real strength >>>>>>is well above 2500." (Enrique Irazoqui) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>for a rating, I discount "first games". I've taken too many "first versions" >>>>>into competition and saw them do very well, only to see the humans "catch on" >>>>>after a few games and turn things around. IE you can take Crafty, put it on a >>>>>server, and change anything of your choice and its rating will almost instantly >>>>>go up. But it will likely drop later. I once screwed up king safety, and when >>>>>I logged on, ICC was abuzz with "wow, watch this thing, it has busted 3 GM's in >>>>>4 game matches, and it is attacking like mad." >>>>> >>>>>It was. But it wasn't long before it became apparent that its attacks were >>>>>generally unsound, and the GM's picked this up (after you get a g4/h4 shoved >>>>>in your face by a program that is a deadly calculator, you can get intimidated) >>>>>they began to smash it, until I found and fixed the bug. Ditto for opening >>>>>book selection. Everyone has found that a new book produces a jump in rating >>>>>until players "figure it out." >>>>> >>>>>With that said, I personally will wait until Rebel 10 is released, and it has >>>>>the opportunity to play several GM players on the chess servers. Rebel 8 had >>>>>serious king-safety problems against IM/GM players. I haven't seen any Rebel 9 >>>>>users playing on ICC so I have no opinion there as of yet. But if there is a >>>>>hole in Rebel 10, it will become apparent after a few games against several GM >>>>>players. Then we can figure out if it is a 2300, 2400, or 2500 player. Note >>>>>that Crafty has absolutely crushed GM players even in game/30, yet *I* don't >>>>>believe it is a 2500 player, unless you restrict it to game/30 and faster. But >>>>>at 40/2hr, things are different... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Regardless of that however, what does it mean? "Pretty close" to a Shirov? >>>>>>>>Certainly not. "Pretty close" to a Kaidanov or Gulko? Hmm almost certainly >>>>>>>>not. "Pretty close" to a Kempinsky, Groszpeter, or Morovic(GMs you have >>>>>>>>probably never heard of)? Well the truth is that these latter GM's would have >>>>>>>>(probably) been toasted by Rebel 10 if they had played it 2 40/2 games. >>>>>>>>Regardless of what statistics say how often would you think Anand fails to beat >>>>>>>>2500 rated GMs? And i do mean beat them handily, not a situation where everyone >>>>>>>>is wondering who is winning as occurred during the Anand Rebel 40/2 games. Now >>>>>>>>of course the draw that Rebel got could have been luck, it could have even been >>>>>>>>the 1 out of however many games a "maybe weak IM"(Robert Hyatt, 1998) might have >>>>>>>>been statistically expected to draw in a match with a GM of Anand's caliber(more >>>>>>>>games are certainly needed to be definitive). Anands caliber bieng World >>>>>>>>Champion caliber. To illustrate what i mean by this(World Champion Caliber) i >>>>>>>>will quote Kasparov reffering to another GM. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>"I had a big discussion with my seconds over lunch about whether to play my new >>>>>>>>plan against Shaked. I would have preferred to see another player's face across >>>>>>>>the board after 13...Rd8--not necessarily Karpov, >>>>>>>>but ANY STRONG PLAYER. IT WAS lIKE USING AN ATOM BOMB TO SHOOT BIRDS."(Inside >>>>>>>>chess magazine) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The so called bird, that Kasparov is reffering to is none other than the >>>>>>>>current WORLD junior champion GM Tal Shaked. Perhaps Kasparov is using a bit >>>>>>>>of bravado(??). Hmm nope Shaked stood no chance whatsoever. Yet we have just >>>>>>>>been witness to a match where a program (Rebel 10), first drew a game, and then >>>>>>>>put up an amazingly staunch resistance, so staunch in fact that Anand famous for >>>>>>>>his speed used as much time as his computer opponent. When we see such a >>>>>>>>performance against a player of "WORLD CHAMPION CALIBER" by said program we can >>>>>>>>definitely feel safe in positing the likelyhood that programs such as >>>>>>>>rebel10/Fritz5 are indeed GM strength. Especially when we can feel certain that >>>>>>>>if we took the weakest GM and paired him against the mighty Anand the outcome of >>>>>>>>the match would have indeed in all likelyhood been far far more clear. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You can stick with your opinion, of course. And I will stick with mine. I >>>>>>>simply see too many holes at present, in the micros. They have their moments, >>>>>>>and Rebel certainly played well. >>>>>> >>>>>>It is best not to (simply) attempt to stick with ones oppinions but rather to >>>>>>follow the very important concept called "the weight of the evidence". Based >>>>>>on two games against Anand the weight of the evidence is not overwhelmingly >>>>>>heavy in either direction. However, from these games one would be hard pressed >>>>>>to form a hypothesis that "the likelyhood is Rebel10 is not GM strength". >>>>>>Indeed the evidence would lend to one forming the exact opposite hypothesis. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>As I said, I have done this. Rebel 10 doesn't offer us enough evidence yet. >>>>>Rebel 8 was nowhere near a GM level. I've seen nothing that says Rebel 9 is >>>>>a quantum leap. Ditto for Rebel 10. Steady improvement? Probably. But until >>>>>I see it play 25-30 games against 2500 players, and roughly "break even" with >>>>>them (or better) I'll withhold judgement. The only two games I have so far >>>>>are a loss and a draw against Anand. That's not enough information for me. >>>>>Yet... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> But I'd still bet on Anand, after giving him >>>>>>>a few games to see how it plays.... >>>>>> >>>>>>As i look in this post i see no hint or even dream of a suggestion that Anand is >>>>>>not clearly superior to Rebel10. In fact if it isn't as strong as a kaidanov or >>>>>>Gulko as mentioned previous i think Anand bieng stronger can be taken for >>>>>>granted. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Unless you talk about fast games. I just did some history tests on ICC and >>>>>>>found that, for example, that Crafty is winning 3 of every 4 games from GM >>>>>>>Dlugy... that means Dlugy+200 for a rating estimate. But that is blitz. I >>>>>>>have similar results against Yasser, Roman, etc... >>>>>> >>>>>>I see no mention of anything other than 40/2 games in this post. Also in other >>>>>>post in this thread even more 40/2 game performances are attested to by other >>>>>>CCC members >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>If you only look at 40/2, what conclusion do you draw from one loss and one >>>>>draw? Performance rating? roughly 2600 after two games. But with just two >>>>>games I don't feel comfortable speculating about a program's rating. It will >>>>>be possible after it plays some where we can see more games... That's one >>>>>reason the Fredkin prize required 25 games for the >2500 rating. A couple of >>>>>games could produce any rating. And if you play 10 computers against Anand, >>>>>the odds are one would win both games on occasion. and have a 3200 rating for >>>>>two games... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>But 40/2 is something else... and I watched an IM (A pretty good one) rip >>>>>>>Rebel 9 badly in two games today. I don't know what kind of hardware, however, >>>>>>>as the rebel user was logged on as a guest. But this particular IM is quite >>>>>>>good against computers... I have been playing another IM some long games on >>>>>>>ICC and am breaking even pretty much, although I (Crafty) can totally shred him >>>>>>>at 5 3 and so forth... >>>>>> >>>>>>Why are you talking about how they are doing at faster controls there is even >>>>>>more evidence that they are GM's at this speed, Anand was trashed in the fast >>>>>>games, and the above game you mentioned by the IM in all likelyhood was but >>>>>>another one of these quick games. As for crafty playing an IM at long games, >>>>>>Crafty i'm sure is a competent opponent (the latest crafty anyway (it's stronger >>>>>>IMHO). I saw crafty 14.? lose a match 6 0 at 40/2 against chessmaster). >>>>>>However Crafty isn't in the same league as Rebel10 or Ftitz5. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Here's my point: Computers are clearly stronger as the time control gets >>>>>shorter. If a computer has trouble with an IM at roughly game/30, then it >>>>>is *certainly* going to have trouble with that same IM at game/2hr. >>>>> >>>>>And given my current hardware advantage, since I do a parallel search and >>>>>Rebel/Fritz don't, I'd take your match request whenever you want to try it. >>>> >>>>I would like to play a match with Crafty at 40 moves in 2 hours. Not out of >>>>disrespect, but respect. I would love to see how it does at slow time controls >>>>vs say Fritz 5 running on a P II 266 or P II 300. If you want to do it I'm game. >>>> >>> >>>If you can actually stand doing this, I'm game... let me know when you'd like >>>to do it... but expect a single game to last 5-6 hours, typically, based on >>>ACM events in the past. That can be miserable... >>> >>I am lucky, I command the hours that I work. So I can do this today or tomorrow >>it does not matter. I just need to know when. It's up to you. I know how long it >>will take :) I have played many games testing computers at slow time controls. I >>will let you set the terms of the match 1 games, 2 games, 6 games, it does not >>matter just let me know what you want to do. Thank you for playing, I know many >>people want to see how your beast does against the best commercal program. It >>will be fun. I will be running Fritz 5 on a P II 300 with 64 meg ram or P II 266 >>with 128 meg ram. The computer I don't use I will relay move from.I would like >>to relay moves at Fics if possible. I don't play on ICC any more. >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>>I can quite easily get 2-3M nodes per second on available hardware. That's >>>>>a big advantage. You don't think speed is important, based on Comments by >>>>>Ed in years past? Ponder this then: "why do you suppose he went to Kryotech >>>>>to get a souped-up AMD machine?" Maybe speed *does* matter after all? >>>>> >>>>>BTW, I've never seen crafty lose a match 6 0 to Chessmaster, although with 6 >>>>>games it is possible. I've also seen it win such matches regularly. CM5000 >>>>>is a good program, as good as rebel and the others, contrary to popular opinion. >>>>>Check out the current Korrespondence Kup. And look to see who's winning and who >>>>>is beating who... I wouldn't discount *any* program so quickly...
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.