Author: Adam Oellermann
Date: 11:25:32 06/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2002 at 19:57:43, Uri Blass wrote:
>On June 13, 2002 at 17:49:26, Bas Hamstra wrote:
>
>>On June 13, 2002 at 17:12:06, Peter Berger wrote:
>>
>>>On June 13, 2002 at 16:01:37, Bas Hamstra wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Of course there are a lot. Differences between stronger engines are very small,
>>>>see Leiden 2002. TheKing had slightly outdated hardware, and bang, it sinks to
>>>>the middle of the field. And numbers 1 and 2 in Leiden ran at significantly
>>>>faster hardware than the rest, coincidence? Give a strong amateur 2x time
>>>>advantage and the pro's will lose the last bit of advantage they have. Not many
>>>>amateurs can beat TigerPalm? Are you kidding? How about 30? Heck, in Leiden
>>>>Comet rolled 3 pro's up in a ball while NOT being on faster hardware: GT and
>>>>TheKing and Shredder :-)
>>>>
>>>>Best regards,
>>>>Bas.
>>>
>>>Uri is usually very careful with his wording ;). He said that there are few
>>>programs that can play on a 486 computer and beat Chess Tiger on the Palm.
>>>
>>>Afaik there aren't 30 amateurs who could do that, or do you disagree?
>>>
>>>Kind regards,
>>>Peter
>>
>>Well, let's say 20, and then I can list em for you :-)
>>
>>Yace, Crafty, Ferret, Callisto, Nightmare, SpiderChess, Monsoon, Bringer,
>>Nejmet, Tao, Insomniac, Comet, Patzer, Xinix, IsiChess, Anmon, GLC, Quark,
>>Queen, Amy, Amyan, Pharaon, Pepito. I am sure I forgot a few.
>>
>>Best regards,
>>Bas.
>
>I think that you overestimate the amateurs.
>
>I do not expect Nejmet on 486 to beat palm tiger.
>
>486 is about 3-5 times faster than the palm if I remember correctly but I am not
>sure if I remember correctly the speed difference.
>
>I guess that tiger is about 5 times better than Nejmet and it means that if you
>give Nejmet hardware that is 5 times faster than Tiger the results may be equal.
>
>If we assume that being twice faster gives 50-70 elo(it seems to be the case
>based on the ssdf list) then it means that being 5 times faster may give maybe
>150 elo.
>
>I guess that Crafty is 100 elo weaker than tiger when Nejmet is at least 50 elo
>weaker than Crafty and it makes the guess that tiger is at least 5 times better
>than Nejmet a good guess.
>
>
>
>I was not impressed by Nejmet because a stupid version of Movei(no hash,no
>pondering,no null move,no book,only piece square table evaluation and some other
>problems) played only one game against Nejmet when Nejmet lost.
>
>The version of Nejmet was Nejmet3.05.
>Movei was lucky and Nejmet fell into a trap that Movei did not plan but my
>impression about Nejmet was not good based on that single game.
>
>Nejmet outsearched Movei to win a pawn and did not understand that it's knight
>was trapped(Movei also does not understand it but Movei does not claim to be a
>top program or to beat palmtiger on 486 and I expect top programs to see that
>the knight has no good squares to go after capturing the pawn and to avoid
>capturing the pawn for positional reasons because all the squares that the
>knight can goto after capturing the pawn are controlled by Movei).
>
>
>Uri
Fascinated by the concept, I played Blikskottel (0.8 prerelease, not publicly
available) against Chess Tiger on my Palm (M125, 33MHz). I honestly didn't
expect Blikskottel to feature, in spite of the advantage (running on AMD Athlon
XP 1600+), but the game went Blikskottel's way:
[Event "Computer chess game"]
[Site "My place"]
[Date "2002.06.14"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Blikskottel 0.8 prerelease"]
[Black "Chess Tiger 14.9 (Palm M125@33MHz)"]
[Result "1-0"]
1. e4 c6 2. d4 d5 3. f3 dxe4 4. fxe4 e5 5. Nf3 Nf6 6. Nxe5 Nxe4 7. Bc4 Qh4+
8. g3 Bb4+ 9. Bd2 Nxg3 10. Bxf7+ Kd8 11. Rg1 Qxh2 12. Nf3 Bxd2+ 13. Qxd2
Qxd2+ 14. Nbxd2 Nf5 15. O-O-O Ke7 16. Bb3 Na6 17. Rde1+ Kd8 18. Ng5 Nd6 19.
Nc4 Nxc4 20. Nf7+ Kc7 21. Nxh8 Bd7 22. Bxc4 Rxh8 23. Rxg7 h5 24. Bxa6 bxa6
25. Ree7 Rd8 26. Rh7 Kd6 27. c4 a5 28. Kd2 Bg4 29. c5+ Kd5 30. Kc3 Be6 31.
Rxh5+ Ke4 32. Rxe6+ Kf4 33. Rh7 Rc8 34. Rxa7 Kf5 35. Re5+ Kf4 36. Rxa5 Rh8
37. Ra7 Rh3+ 38. Kd2 Rh2+ 39. Kc3 Rh3+ 40. Kc4 Rh2 41. Rf7+ Kg4 42. Re8 Kg5
43. Rg8+ Kh6 44. Rh8+ Kg6 45. Rxh2 Kxf7 46. Rh6 Ke7 47. Rxc6 Kd8 48. Rh6
Kc7 49. Rh7+ Kb8 50. c6 Kc8 51. d5 Kb8 52. Kc5 Ka8 53. Kb6 Kb8 54. Rh8#
{White mates} 1-0
OK, so we're talking about a **huge** difference in processing power, but this
is poor Blikskottel's very first win against a name, AFAIK.
It was fascinating to see how Blikskottel had a huge advantage in raw depth
during opening/midgame, but CT compensated somewhat with clearly superior
extensions. Anyway, as the game moved on, CT's search depths began to close the
gap (Blikskottel's hash tables are disabled for debugging at the mo), but the
damage was done.
Adam
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.