Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Dutch Open Leiden after round 6

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 08:34:33 10/21/02

Go up one level in this thread

On October 21, 2002 at 10:35:36, Johan Hutting wrote:

>On October 20, 2002 at 20:11:57, Uri Blass wrote:
>>On October 20, 2002 at 19:37:18, Johan Hutting wrote:
>>>On October 20, 2002 at 15:22:41, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>winboard version of Ant is clearly better
>>>>than the
>>>>winboard version of Celes.
>>>which is over a year old anyway.
>my point was that comparing with ancient released versions is silly. Especially
>at low level the strength varies a lot.
>>Ant winboard version is also old.
>>What is your estimate for the level
>>of Celes relative to the winboard engines
>>in Leo's tournament?
>No clue, if I see larsenVB and tscp playing in 3rd division I wonder what Celes
>does in 4th :)

Simple answer

Celes simply did not score well enough in the previous 4th division.

The level to get to the 3th division is clearly better than tscp.
The level of tscp is not enough even to promote to the 4th division.

You may ask Leo to use the last Celes but I doubt if it is going to be strong
enough to promote.

For the low divisions the level that is needed to promote is higher than the
level of the higher division.

It is not going to be the case in the high division and part of the programs
that pronmoted to the first division went back to the second division.

Abrok,Biglion,Knightdreamer,List,Rdchess,Tao and maybe gnuchess(if Leo finds it
stable) may fight for promotion.

It seems that Celes needs to be better than one of them in order to promote.

7th place may be also enough for pronmotion if Celes can beat Soldat.

>>Is it better than the public Ant?
>I don't have ant installed on my computer.
>>>>It lost against the baron and celes with
>>>so baron is also clearly worse then ant?
>>Baron is clearly better than the winboard Ant but
>>It was not clear for me if it was better than
>>the last Ant.
>'clearly better' is a bit harsch I suppose. I valued (a stable) ant at ~2300,
>while baron is ~2200. It's been a while since I tested with Baron though.
>>The point is that they repeated the same opening after losing
>>and in both games the queen got from d8 to d5 and d6 and d8.
>It's so amazing Kasparov still plays 1.e4 after all those games he lost with it
>Openings have so many variations that you could still opt to play them, even if
>you lose a couple of games with it. If you look at the games Ant played you'll
>notice it doesn't pick the 'best' move in some positions. Celes went down to
>-0.05 after 15.c3 after which I considered the opening to be going well for

I admit that I did not analyze the games but it seemed to me that their problem
were after the opening and the d8->d5->d6 and few moves later->d8 line for black
does not seem to be a good line when I look at it.

>>I know that there is an opening 1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5
>>3.Nc3 Qd6 but even if this opening is good
>>it seemed from the games that Ant did not know to play
>>it so it is a clearly bad choice for opening book.
>See previous comment.
>>>Ant only scored 1 point vs Djenghis and a very lucky half point vs ZZZZZ.
>>>>1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 and in both games the queen came later to d8.
>>>>I do not understand this opening choice.
>>>Perhaps you should participate in a tournament yourself to figure out the
>>>importance of good books, well tested engines and why to use unreleased
>>If I participate I participate with unreleased version
>>to prevent preperations but I do not plan to participate with untested version.
>That's a healthy idea :)
>I have a much faster version of Celes (speedup 20-25%) but I'm not sure if it
>runs stable. Perhaps I'll play with it next week.
>>I do not believe in the importance of books and the
>>success of List with no book convince me that a book
>>is not very important.
>As I pointed out to Shark, what works for other people may not work for you.
>>I believe that something with similiar level to list4.61
>>that is unknown with no book or a very small book
>>has good chances to get 50%.
>>My latest movei(not public) has book and pondering
>>but my tests are almost always with no book when
>>I always change the
>>first move so I can get different games.
>hmmm, you'll still get alot of repetitions that way.

If you play more than 40 games then I agree but if you play 40 games you get no
repetition when you always change the first move(the only way to get repetition
is changing the order of moves but it does not happen often when the first move
is 1.a4 or 1.f3(it can happen in 1.e4 e6 2.d4 to 1.d4 e6 2.e4 but I do not see
logical change from 1.a3 e5 2.e4 to 1.e4 e5 2.a3


This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.