Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Thanks for extracting this!

Author: Vasik Rajlich

Date: 01:34:05 01/02/06

Go up one level in this thread

On January 02, 2006 at 03:11:49, Uri Blass wrote:

>On January 01, 2006 at 16:00:00, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>On January 01, 2006 at 08:53:35, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>I agree but I do not see a reason not to count qsearch nodes and the author did
>>>not admit that he does not count qsearch nodes and it seems to me based on his
>>>posts that he counts every node in his search so I was surprised to find out
>>>that he does not do it.
>>>I did not want to believe GCP that rybka does not count qsearch nodes because I
>>>assumed that Vasik knows more about rybka and I assume that he does not give
>>>misinformation but it seems that I was wrong and GCP was right.
>>Happy new year!

Happy new year from me :)

>>Now that you have made this step, it's time to start wondering if Rybka is
>>really doing something entirely different and new and has such a huge
>>evaluation, or if we should see Rybka as a Fruit-like engine but with some of
>>Fruit's weaknesses solved, and if it's really not doing anything really special.
>>How much stronger do you think Fruit would get with a better kingsafety and a
>>better extension system, and some evaluation holes plugged? As strong as Rybka?
>I believe that fruit can be better than rybka1.2 when it is improved but of
>course it proves nothing because I also expect rybka to be improved.

Yes, I am sure that Fruit 3.0 and Fruit 4.0 will show that Fabien's approach is
nowhere near an end.

>It seems to me that rybka also can be improved by a better kingsafety and a
>better extension system.
>>And why is Rybka's endgame so spectacularly bad in some situtions (but fine in
>>others)? Is Vincents preprocessing theory correct? Was Vasik lazy regarding
>>those issues?

Ok, not talking about Rybka of course, as I wouldn't like to rob you of the joy
of figuring this out :), just about pre-processing in general:

1) I am not sure why a preprocessor would play especially badly in the endgame.
2) Amir has explained (you can find this in the archives) that Junior started as
a preprocessor, but the last traces of its pre-processing were removed around
'99 or so.
3) I am not sure why a preprocessor would be more likely to make the sorts of
weird blunders that Rybka sometimes makes (like 19. .. h3 against Ikarus).


>I do not know the reason but I do not believe vincent's theory.
>I guess that the reason is that Vasik still did not write the relevant code.

This page took 0.01 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.