Crazyhouse tournaments and rating list

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Re: CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.4 Gauntlet Tour Nr 21

Post by Ferdy »

hgm wrote:I again uploaded a new version (0.06). I finally found a King-Safety term that worked. I had to include a measure for the material in hand for that, something that earlier versions did not have available. But in this version it is kept track of incrementally. This new King Safety makes it much more aggressive.

I tried a breadth-first QS to prevent search explosion, with totally disappointing results. Even in cases were the search explosion was extreme, it did not do anything to avoid it. On the contrary, the search just took far more nodes. I had expected that making sure short refutation would always be seen before long ones would narrow the window on the lines that drag on forever so much that it cold be searched much faster (perhaps even closing the window completely, so that it would not have to be searched at all). But either my implementation was totally wrong, or this is not the case, and the long lines are really score-determining.

So I resorted to a hack, and limited QS to 6 levels. After which I just give a hefty bonus to the side to move. This did improve the results against Sjaak. In difficult positions the depth doesn't drop below 4 anymore (before it could even drop to 2, and then usually a blunder would be played that cost it the game).

This change also reduced the number of crashes. I suppose most of these were asserts triggering because the maximum depth of 100 ply was exceeded, which now cannot happen anymore. Strange enough I still had a number of crashes in the 1000 games I was runing tonight, and they all occurred when CrazyWa had black in the position after 1.d4 ! Unfortunately that does not reproduce easily, because CrazyWa randomizes in the first 5 moves. I guess I should make it print the value of its initial randomizer key (based on starting time), and a way to enter that key inorder to reproduce things. As a new instance of CrazyWa is started for every game it is really strange it already crashes on its first move!

BTW, will CrazyWa have to play games with ponder on, in the upcoming championship? I have not implemented pondering yet, and if it is not needed I can better spend the time on other stuff, as there still is much to improve.

Code: Select all

file         : ccva_tour_nr_23.pgn
event        : CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.6 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 23
score window : [-1000000.0, +1000000.0]

 nr                    player  games   sumTime aveDep aveTime(s)
  1   NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit     32  01:30:30  14.81   5.78
  2       CrazyWa 0.0.6 32bit    192  09:25:54  11.21   5.49
  3     Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit     32  01:38:22   8.43   4.99
  4 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit     32  01:32:13   7.51   5.74
  5          Sjeng 11.2 32bit     32  01:44:03   6.71   5.59
  6         TSCP zh 1.1 32bit     32  01:16:44   5.17   5.02
  7      Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit     32  01:43:06   4.89   5.84
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Depth and time comparison

Post by Ferdy »

Code: Select all

Blitz average depth and time comparison
 
 nr                    player  games  pts%   sumTime aveDep    aveTime
  1         Sunsetter 9 32bit    915  43.5  63:55:00  15.92  00:07:847
  2    NebiyuAlien 1.45 32bit    204  37.0  08:18:38  15.44  00:05:888
  3   NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit    826  44.2  39:40:58  15.22  00:06:308
  4       CrazyWa 0.0.6 32bit    192  62.8  09:25:54  11.21  00:05:488
  5       CrazyWa 0.0.4 32bit    336  42.4  16:06:24  11.10  00:05:761
  6       CrazyWa 0.0.1 32bit    129  55.8  06:29:10  11.07  00:05:965
  7       CrazyWa 0.0.0 32bit     96  32.3  05:13:19  10.54  00:06:058
  8        Sunsetter 7g 64bit    296  51.7  10:26:36  10.40  00:04:220
  9      Imortal 2.9001 32bit   1075  74.8  71:15:05  10.37  00:07:279
 10         TJchess 1.3 64bit   1105  65.7  80:31:31   9.65  00:07:734
 11         TJchess 1.1 64bit    152  53.9  07:34:39   9.42  00:05:927
 12     Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit    931  45.9  41:26:47   9.21  00:05:554
 13         Imortal 2.0 32bit    295  65.8  13:27:01   8.24  00:05:404
 14 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit    484  23.0  21:47:48   7.47  00:06:044
 15         Imortal 1.0 32bit     94  37.8  04:16:15   7.03  00:05:481
 16          Sjeng 11.2 32bit    864  48.9  39:57:42   6.70  00:05:796
 17         TSCP zh 1.1 32bit    463  26.6  18:52:38   5.12  00:05:163
 18      Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit    483  38.5  23:42:17   5.02  00:06:258

file         : Blitz.pgn
score window : [-1000000.0, +1000000.0]
notes        : 1. games and pts% are not affected by score window.
               2. Table is sorted by aveDep in descending order.
               3. aveTime is the average time/move in m:s:ms
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Winning score and win probability

Post by Ferdy »

Code: Select all

file         : Blitz.pgn
score window : [+3.0, +6.0]

 nr                    player games pts(%) winProb
  1         Sunsetter 9 32bit   915  43.50    0.88
  2         TJchess 1.3 64bit  1105  65.75    0.88
  3          Sjeng 11.2 32bit   864  48.90    0.81
  4         TJchess 1.1 64bit   152  53.95    0.79
  5      Imortal 2.9001 32bit  1075  74.79    0.79
  6       CrazyWa 0.0.1 32bit   129  55.81    0.77
  7         Imortal 2.0 32bit   295  65.76    0.74
  8       CrazyWa 0.0.6 32bit   192  62.76    0.72
  9       CrazyWa 0.0.4 32bit   336  42.41    0.59
 10   NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit   826  44.25    0.57
 11      Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit   483  38.51    0.57
 12         Imortal 1.0 32bit    94  37.77    0.56
 13 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit   484  23.04    0.50
 14     Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit   931  45.86    0.46
 15        Sunsetter 7g 64bit   296  51.69    0.45
 16    NebiyuAlien 1.45 32bit   204  37.01    0.41
 17       CrazyWa 0.0.0 32bit    96  32.29    0.40
 18         TSCP zh 1.1 32bit   463  26.57    0.38
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Re: CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.4 Gauntlet Tour Nr 21

Post by Ferdy »

hgm wrote:I uploaded a new version of CrazyWa (0.0.7). I my tests it consistently beats Sjeng by ~58%, but I guess this is mainly due to the defective time management of the latter. (It hardly ever uses more than 25 sec for a game, often as little as 10, against CrazyWa's 1.5 min.)

Thanks for the InBetween file. I was already wondering why Nebiyu lost so many games.
Nice Progress :!:

Code: Select all

   # PLAYER                       :  RATING   +/-   GAMES  PTS(%)
   1 Imortal 2.9001 32bit         :  2862.6  39.4    1099      75
   2 TJchess 1.3 64bit            :  2797.9  36.7    1129      66
   3 Imortal 2.0 32bit            :  2674.7  50.1     295      66
   4 Sunsetter 9 32bit            :  2674.1  37.9     939      45
   5 TJchess 1.1 64bit            :  2600.7  69.0     152      54
   6 Sunsetter 7g 64bit           :  2548.4  48.7     296      52
   7 Imortal 1.0 32bit            :  2524.8  92.0      94      38
   8 CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit          :  2326.5  58.6     216      49
   9 Sjeng 11.2 32bit             :  2300.0  28.1     888      49
  10 NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit      :  2292.2  28.2     850      44
  11 Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit        :  2281.7  27.2     955      46
  12 CrazyWa 0.0.6 32bit          :  2271.3  54.2     192      63
  13 CrazyWa 0.0.4 32bit          :  2246.3  42.8     336      42
  14 CrazyWa 0.0.1 32bit          :  2226.5  63.8     129      56
  15 Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit         :  2121.8  38.4     507      38
  16 NebiyuAlien 1.45 32bit       :  2069.8  55.3     204      37
  17 CrazyWa 0.0.0 32bit          :  2012.6  80.7      96      32
  18 TSCP zh 1.1 32bit            :  2006.9  39.5     487      26
  19 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit    :  1974.9  39.9     508      22

White advantage = 60.35 +/- 6.22
Draw rate (equal opponents) = 1.28 % +/- 0.19
Two abandoned games.

[Event "CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.7 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 24"]
[Site "i7-2600K"]
[Date "2016.10.31"]
[Round "2"]
[White "TSCP zh 1.1 32bit"]
[Black "CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "37"]
[Termination "abandoned"]
[TimeControl "180+2"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. e4 {book} d6 {book} 2. d4 {book} Nf6 {book} 3. Nc3 {+0.41/6 7.7s}
Bd7 {-0.44/10 6.8s} 4. Nf3 {+0.56/6 7.5s} Qc8 {-0.38/9 4.2s}
5. Bd3 {+0.86/6 7.4s} Bg4 {-0.43/10 5.4s} 6. Bg5 {+0.83/6 7.2s}
Nbd7 {-0.47/9 7.3s} 7. O-O {+0.80/6 7.0s} e5 {-0.26/10 7.0s}
8. dxe5 {+0.63/6 6.8s} dxe5 {-0.14/9 5.4s} 9. Bxf6 {+0.53/6 6.7s}
Nxf6 {-0.31/8 2.9s} 10. P@d5 {+0.66/5 6.5s} Bc5 {+0.89/9 12s}
11. Bb5+ {+0.47/5 6.4s} Kf8 {+1.12/9 8.5s} 12. N@b3 {+0.24/5 6.2s}
Bb4 {+2.20/8 7.6s} 13. Bd3 {-0.91/6 6.1s} B@h5 {+2.12/7 3.3s}
14. Nbd2 {-0.76/6 5.9s} P@h3 {+3.69/10 4.9s} 15. gxh3 {-1.01/7 5.8s}
Bxf3 {+3.42/9 3.2s} 16. Nxf3 {-1.30/6 5.7s} Qxh3 {+3.73/9 5.7s}
17. P@g2 {-0.05/5 5.6s} Bxf3 {+3.48/9 9.4s} 18. gxh3 {-1.55/5 5.4s}
Bxd1 {+5.68/8 3.6s} 19. Rfxd1 {-1.83/5 5.3s, Black disconnects} 1-0

[Event "CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.7 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 24"]
[Site "i7-2600K"]
[Date "2016.10.31"]
[Round "3"]
[White "TJchess 1.3 64bit"]
[Black "CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "45"]
[Termination "abandoned"]
[TimeControl "180+2"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. e4 {book} e6 {book} 2. d4 {book} Nc6 {-0.14/9 3.2s} 3. Nf3 {+0.35/10 3.3s}
Nf6 {-0.14/9 3.2s} 4. Bd3 {+0.88/11 3.8s} Nb4 {-0.04/9 3.8s}
5. O-O {+1.01/11 3.5s} Nxd3 {+0.10/11 3.2s} 6. cxd3 {+1.08/11 3.7s}
Be7 {+0.06/10 5.2s} 7. Nc3 {+1.41/10 3.2s} Kf8 {+0.06/10 5.1s}
8. Bf4 {+1.92/10 3.2s} B@g4 {+0.20/10 6.7s} 9. N@e5 {+1.89/10 3.0s}
Bh5 {+0.90/10 3.4s} 10. Re1 {+2.01/10 8.1s} d6 {+2.23/12 7.6s}
11. Nc4 {+1.53/12 3.9s} Bxf3 {+2.59/11 3.3s} 12. Qxf3 {+1.49/12 3.1s}
N@c2 {+2.35/10 4.4s} 13. B@e3 {+0.84/11 7.0s} Nxe1 {+2.41/10 3.5s}
14. Rxe1 {+1.63/11 3.7s} d5 {+2.20/9 4.9s} 15. exd5 {+1.87/11 10s}
exd5 {+2.47/9 11s} 16. Ne5 {+1.92/10 6.2s} P@d6 {+3.09/8 4.2s}
17. P@h6 {+3.00/10 6.1s} dxe5 {+1.65/8 4.2s} 18. hxg7+ {+4.10/9 2.0s}
Kxg7 {+0.83/8 6.9s} 19. dxe5 {+4.26/9 7.7s} Ng4 {-0.14/7 7.7s}
20. P@f6+ {+6.15/8 3.4s} Bxf6 {-1.70/7 8.4s} 21. Nxd5 {+7.23/8 9.0s}
Bxe5 {-4.39/6 8.3s} 22. Bxe5+ {+17.06/8 11s} f6 {-10.46/6 6.5s}
23. Bxf6+ {+M13/8 19s, Black disconnects} 1-0


Average depth and time.

Code: Select all

 nr                    player  games  pts%   sumTime aveDep    aveTime
  1         Sunsetter 9 32bit     24  95.8  00:54:06  15.27  00:04:933
  2   NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit     24  31.2  01:15:26  14.56  00:05:787
  3       CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit    216  48.6  09:59:04  10.76  00:05:614
  4      Imortal 2.9001 32bit     24  93.8  01:00:40   9.89  00:05:466
  5         TJchess 1.3 64bit     24  91.7  01:04:18   9.39  00:05:600
  6     Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit     24  37.5  01:04:01   8.99  00:05:283
  7 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit     24   8.3  01:08:27   8.13  00:05:926
  8          Sjeng 11.2 32bit     24  68.8  01:11:25   6.91  00:05:798
  9         TSCP zh 1.1 32bit     24  14.6  01:04:14   5.21  00:05:145
 10      Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit     24  20.8  01:14:01   4.87  00:06:203

file         : ccva_tour_nr_24.pgn
event        : CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.7 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 24
score window : [-1000000.0, +1000000.0]
notes        : 1. games and pts% are not affected by score window.
               2. Table is sorted by aveDep in descending order.
               3. aveTime is the average time/move in m:s:ms
Top
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 27808
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.4 Gauntlet Tour Nr 21

Post by hgm »

It seems that castling is quite important in Crazyhouse! I finally got to implement it. (Upto now I had disabled it in the move generator, because castling through check was not tested for yet in the daughter node, and I had to make up a sensible evaluation for it to make it actually do it.) The difference is pretty dramatic. Score against the (time-self-handicapping) Sjeng went up from 63% to 77%, and against Imortal 1.0 from 32% to 43%.

The version that castles (0.0.8) can be downloaded here.

I am sorry about the crashes. Part of those are asserts on a bad hash move (no own piece on from-square). I could of course just ignore the hash hit in that case, which is what I will eventually do, but in the development phase I wanted to know how often this happens, and make sure that it is indeed due to a key collision, and not some bug. I now made it such that triggering an assert will cause the GUI to display a popup with the reason (through a telluser command), and also write info on a file 'dump.txt' in the engine directory.

Some of the crashes are very illusive, though. I still get a 'score inversion' error (i.e. lower bound > upper bound), often in the first move of the game, and then always when the opponent opened 1.d4. Now it randomizes the first 5 moves, which makes it difficult to reproduce. So I let it print the randomizer key (obtained at startup from the time) in such a case, so that I can use that same key when trying to reproduce it. But it still does not reproduce. This is very weird, almost unbelievable. Nothing was done before, so history tables, hash, killers, everything should be pristine. How can it not be completely deterministic under such conditions? The only thing I can think of is using some uninitialized local variable that happens to map to a memory location on the stack that was used for storing the time (which is read during search to see if it is time to stop).

As if that is not bad enough, the latest few versions now also suffer from occasional crashes that are not asserts, where Windows starts complaining that the application is no longer functioning.
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Re: CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.4 Gauntlet Tour Nr 21

Post by Ferdy »

hgm wrote:It seems that castling is quite important in Crazyhouse! I finally got to implement it. (Upto now I had disabled it in the move generator, because castling through check was not tested for yet in the daughter node, and I had to make up a sensible evaluation for it to make it actually do it.) The difference is pretty dramatic. Score against the (time-self-handicapping) Sjeng went up from 63% to 77%, and against Imortal 1.0 from 32% to 43%.

The version that castles (0.0.8) can be downloaded here.

I am sorry about the crashes. Part of those are asserts on a bad hash move (no own piece on from-square). I could of course just ignore the hash hit in that case, which is what I will eventually do, but in the development phase I wanted to know how often this happens, and make sure that it is indeed due to a key collision, and not some bug. I now made it such that triggering an assert will cause the GUI to display a popup with the reason (through a telluser command), and also write info on a file 'dump.txt' in the engine directory.

Some of the crashes are very illusive, though. I still get a 'score inversion' error (i.e. lower bound > upper bound), often in the first move of the game, and then always when the opponent opened 1.d4. Now it randomizes the first 5 moves, which makes it difficult to reproduce. So I let it print the randomizer key (obtained at startup from the time) in such a case, so that I can use that same key when trying to reproduce it. But it still does not reproduce. This is very weird, almost unbelievable. Nothing was done before, so history tables, hash, killers, everything should be pristine. How can it not be completely deterministic under such conditions? The only thing I can think of is using some uninitialized local variable that happens to map to a memory location on the stack that was used for storing the time (which is read during search to see if it is time to stop).

As if that is not bad enough, the latest few versions now also suffer from occasional crashes that are not asserts, where Windows starts complaining that the application is no longer functioning.
I use cute chess gui, and even though I added

Code: Select all

"stderrFile" : "crazywa_0.0.7_errFile.txt",

in json file. Nothing was written there.

Code: Select all

{
		"command" : ""CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit.exe"",
		"name" : "CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 32,
				"max" : 2147483646,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "memory",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 256
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Resign",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 0,
				"max" : 200,
				"min" : -200,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "xboard",
		"stderrFile" : "crazywa_0.0.7_errFile.txt",
		"variants" : [
			"crazyhouse",
			"shogi",
			"minishogi",
			"judkinshogi",
			"torishogi",
			"euroshogi",
			"crazywa",
			"8x8+6_crazyhouse",
			"8x8+7_crazyhouse"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "C:\\games\\chess\\engines\\nobook\\Crazyhouse\\CrazyWa"
	}
Thanks for the update.
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Re: CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.4 Gauntlet Tour Nr 21

Post by Ferdy »

hgm wrote:It seems that castling is quite important in Crazyhouse! I finally got to implement it. (Upto now I had disabled it in the move generator, because castling through check was not tested for yet in the daughter node, and I had to make up a sensible evaluation for it to make it actually do it.) The difference is pretty dramatic. Score against the (time-self-handicapping) Sjeng went up from 63% to 77%, and against Imortal 1.0 from 32% to 43%.

The version that castles (0.0.8) can be downloaded here.

I am sorry about the crashes. Part of those are asserts on a bad hash move (no own piece on from-square). I could of course just ignore the hash hit in that case, which is what I will eventually do, but in the development phase I wanted to know how often this happens, and make sure that it is indeed due to a key collision, and not some bug. I now made it such that triggering an assert will cause the GUI to display a popup with the reason (through a telluser command), and also write info on a file 'dump.txt' in the engine directory.

Some of the crashes are very illusive, though. I still get a 'score inversion' error (i.e. lower bound > upper bound), often in the first move of the game, and then always when the opponent opened 1.d4. Now it randomizes the first 5 moves, which makes it difficult to reproduce. So I let it print the randomizer key (obtained at startup from the time) in such a case, so that I can use that same key when trying to reproduce it. But it still does not reproduce. This is very weird, almost unbelievable. Nothing was done before, so history tables, hash, killers, everything should be pristine. How can it not be completely deterministic under such conditions? The only thing I can think of is using some uninitialized local variable that happens to map to a memory location on the stack that was used for storing the time (which is read during search to see if it is time to stop).

As if that is not bad enough, the latest few versions now also suffer from occasional crashes that are not asserts, where Windows starts complaining that the application is no longer functioning.
Nice improvement.

Code: Select all

   # PLAYER                       :  RATING   +/-   GAMES  PTS(%)
   1 Imortal 2.9001 32bit         :  2853.5  38.5    1115      75
   2 TJchess 1.3 64bit            :  2787.2  36.6    1145      66
   3 Sunsetter 9 32bit            :  2665.3  38.3     955      45
   4 Imortal 2.0 32bit            :  2663.5  50.4     311      66
   5 TJchess 1.1 64bit            :  2585.1  62.7     168      55
   6 Sunsetter 7g 64bit           :  2541.5  47.9     296      52
   7 Imortal 1.0 32bit            :  2520.2  78.0     110      41
   8 CrazyWa 0.0.8 32bit          :  2433.6  60.9     192      51
   9 CrazyWa 0.0.7 32bit          :  2323.3  58.5     216      49
  10 Sjeng 11.2 32bit             :  2300.0  28.9     904      49
  11 NebiyuAlien 1.45a 32bit      :  2292.3  28.8     866      44
  12 Sjaak II 1.3.1a 64bit        :  2279.1  28.1     971      45
  13 CrazyWa 0.0.6 32bit          :  2269.2  55.4     192      63
  14 CrazyWa 0.0.4 32bit          :  2244.3  43.6     336      42
  15 CrazyWa 0.0.1 32bit          :  2224.0  66.8     129      56
  16 Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit         :  2118.1  37.6     523      37
  17 NebiyuAlien 1.45 32bit       :  2066.4  54.7     204      37
  18 CrazyWa 0.0.0 32bit          :  2009.5  79.7      96      32
  19 TSCP zh 1.1 32bit            :  2003.3  40.0     503      25
  20 KKFChess 2.6.7 beta 32bit    :  1969.3  42.2     524      22

White advantage = 60.92 +/- 5.89
Draw rate (equal opponents) = 1.36 % +/- 0.19
Using Ordo, Sjeng 11.2 32bit is set to 2300
There are two abandoned games.

[Event "CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.8 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 25"]
[Site "i7-2600K"]
[Date "2016.11.01"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Pulsar 2009 9b 32bit"]
[Black "CrazyWa 0.0.8 32bit"]
[Result "1-0"]
[PlyCount "23"]
[Termination "abandoned"]
[TimeControl "180+2"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. e4 {book} Nf6 {book} 2. Nc3 {book} Nc6 {book} 3. d4 {+0.68/7 11s}
e5 {+0.20/10 3.5s} 4. dxe5 {+0.97/6 8.5s} Nxe5 {+0.27/10 11s}
5. P@g5 {+1.29/6 8.8s} Ng8 {+0.52/9 3.2s} 6. Be3 {+1.23/5 9.8s}
Bb4 {+0.21/9 8.6s} 7. Qd4 {+1.22/6 9.1s} Qe7 {+0.43/9 4.8s} 8. f4 {+1.05/5 8.4s}
Bxc3+ {+1.41/8 4.0s} 9. Qxc3 {+1.68/6 7.6s} Ng4 {+2.61/8 5.4s}
10. O-O-O {-1.66/5 7.0s} Qxe4 {+2.12/7 3.0s} 11. Qxg7 {-0.90/5 7.2s}
Nxe3 {+7.21/7 6.1s} 12. Bd3 {-4.49/4 6.4s, Black disconnects} 1-0

[Event "CCVA CrazyWa 0.0.8 Gauntlet Blitz Tour Nr 25"]
[Site "i7-2600K"]
[Date "2016.11.01"]
[Round "1"]
[White "CrazyWa 0.0.8 32bit"]
[Black "TSCP zh 1.1 32bit"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "26"]
[Termination "abandoned"]
[TimeControl "180+2"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. e4 {book} e6 {book} 2. d4 {book} Nc6 {book} 3. Nf3 {book} Nf6 {book}
4. Bd3 {book} Nb4 {book} 5. O-O {book} d5 {-0.45/7 7.9s} 6. exd5 {+0.42/10 9.4s}
Nxd3 {-0.58/6 7.7s} 7. dxe6 {+1.79/10 7.8s} Bxe6 {-0.19/6 7.5s}
8. cxd3 {+1.99/9 9.1s} P@g4 {-0.12/5 7.3s} 9. Ng5 {+2.04/8 9.5s}
Qxd4 {-1.80/5 7.1s} 10. Nxe6 {+2.73/8 9.0s} fxe6 {-1.94/5 7.0s}
11. B@c3 {+2.75/7 6.5s} Qc5 {-1.87/5 6.8s} 12. Bxf6 {+3.94/8 9.2s}
gxf6 {-1.87/5 6.6s} 13. Qxg4 {+3.69/7 6.4s}
B@f5 {-1.92/4 6.5s, White disconnects} 0-1
Top
TonyJH
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2006 4:41 am
Location: USA

Re: Crazyhouse tournaments and rating list

Post by TonyJH »

I just saw a post on the lichess forum (from the Sunsetter author) that the crazyhouse version of Stockfish is playing very well now:

https://github.com/ddugovic/Stockfish/issues/88

"Result of Stockfish vs. Sunsetter 9: 44 - 5 - 1 (W - L - D)"

"Score of Stockfish 301016 64 vs TJchess 1.3-x64: 44 - 6 - 0"
Top
Ferdy
Posts: 4833
Joined: Sun Aug 10, 2008 3:15 pm
Location: Philippines

Re: Crazyhouse tournaments and rating list

Post by Ferdy »

TonyJH wrote:I just saw a post on the lichess forum (from the Sunsetter author) that the crazyhouse version of Stockfish is playing very well now:

https://github.com/ddugovic/Stockfish/issues/88

"Result of Stockfish vs. Sunsetter 9: 44 - 5 - 1 (W - L - D)"

"Score of Stockfish 301016 64 vs TJchess 1.3-x64: 44 - 6 - 0"
Amazing results :!: and this is from TC 40moves/10s. I will include it in the rating list and the upcoming champs tour.
Top
Carlos777
Posts: 1736
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 6:09 pm

Re: Crazyhouse tournaments and rating list

Post by Carlos777 »

Ferdy wrote:
TonyJH wrote:I just saw a post on the lichess forum (from the Sunsetter author) that the crazyhouse version of Stockfish is playing very well now:

https://github.com/ddugovic/Stockfish/issues/88

"Result of Stockfish vs. Sunsetter 9: 44 - 5 - 1 (W - L - D)"

"Score of Stockfish 301016 64 vs TJchess 1.3-x64: 44 - 6 - 0"
Amazing results :!: and this is from TC 40moves/10s. I will include it in the rating list and the upcoming champs tour.
I ran a little match at 15'+3" with my own test suite of 33 positions:

Stockfish 011116 - Imortal 2.9001: +43 -22 =1

Very strong engine, although its eval is sometimes inconsistent.

For example:

Code: Select all

[Event "My Tournament"]
[Site "PhenomII"]
[Date "2016.11.01"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Stockfish 011116"]
[Black "Imortal 2.9001"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "65"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[TimeControl "900+3"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. e4 {book} e5 {book} 2. Nf3 {book} Nc6 {-0.40/15 45s} 3. Nc3 {+0.37/20 44s}
Nf6 {-0.46/14 36s} 4. Bb5 {+0.59/20 20s} Bc5 {-0.06/13 41s}
5. O-O {+0.79/18 8.8s} d6 {-0.04/13 39s} 6. d3 {+0.83/20 21s} a6 {+0.09/14 26s}
7. Ba4 {+1.12/21 39s} Ng4 {-0.29/13 36s} 8. Nd5 {+1.45/18 9.8s}
Be6 {-0.08/12 24s} 9. Bg5 {+1.69/18 32s} Qd7 {-0.44/12 34s}
10. h3 {+2.64/17 9.4s} Nxf2 {+1.02/13 32s} 11. Rxf2 {+2.93/16 5.3s}
Bxd5 {+0.45/11 31s} 12. exd5 {+3.35/19 14s} P@g3 {+0.08/11 29s}
13. dxc6 {+5.01/18 18s} gxf2+ {-1.36/12 28s} 14. Kh2 {+5.37/20 44s}
bxc6 {-1.38/12 19s} 15. N@h5 {+5.82/18 34s} P@g3+ {-1.57/11 18s}
16. Nxg3 {+6.42/18 14s} h6 {-1.60/10 25s} 17. P@b7 {+6.93/18 16s}
N@g4+ {-2.04/10 15s} 18. hxg4 {+6.65/19 43s} hxg5+ {-6.70/9 24s}
19. N@h5 {+7.70/17 24s} Rb8 {-5.03/10 22s} 20. B@c8 {+8.01/17 35s}
B@f4 {-7.48/8 22s} 21. N@f5 {+8.52/17 26s} Qxf5 {-5.39/9 21s}
22. Bxf5 {+9.50/17 18s} N@e7 {-6.02/10 13s} 23. Q@c8+ {+7.39/17 32s}
Nxc8 {-1.96/10 19s} 24. bxc8=Q+ {+0.64/16 60s} Rxc8 {-1.96/10 18s}
25. Bxc6+ {+1.47/17 10s} Kf8 {-2.50/11 17s} 26. N@e2 {0.00/17 28s}
P@e6 {+1.72/10 11s} 27. Bxe6 {-0.75/16 82s} fxe6 {+4.55/9 11s}
28. P@h3 {0.00/16 23s} B@e1 {+7.21/10 15s} 29. Qxe1 {-3.04/17 33s}
fxe1=Q {+7.22/11 11s} 30. Rxe1 {-2.85/16 2.3s} Rxh5 {+6.93/10 15s}
31. P@e7+ {-9.56/18 90s} Kxe7 {+9.28/9 12s} 32. B@e3 {-12.72/18 67s}
Rxh3+ {+17.61/8 11s} 33. Kxh3 {-17.83/16 16s, Black wins by adjudication} 0-1
At move 22, it seems Stockfish has a win, but it got worse from it and finally lost the game.

Another example:

Code: Select all

[Event "My Tournament"]
[Site "PhenomII"]
[Date "2016.11.01"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Stockfish 011116"]
[Black "Imortal 2.9001"]
[Result "0-1"]
[PlyCount "67"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[TimeControl "900+3"]
[Variant "crazyhouse"]

1. d4 {book} e6 {-0.43/16 45s} 2. Nf3 {+0.15/22 47s} Nc6 {-0.39/15 43s}
3. Nbd2 {+0.33/20 31s} Nf6 {-0.22/14 41s} 4. e4 {+0.59/18 12s} d6 {0.00/14 39s}
5. Bb5 {+0.66/19 29s} Bd7 {-0.40/15 37s} 6. O-O {+0.80/18 8.6s}
Be7 {-0.02/14 35s} 7. c3 {+1.20/19 16s} Rb8 {-0.47/13 34s} 8. Re1 {+1.25/20 39s}
a6 {-0.21/14 27s} 9. Bd3 {+1.35/20 16s} Ng4 {-0.42/15 29s}
10. h3 {+1.59/19 8.5s} Nxf2 {+0.04/14 19s} 11. Kxf2 {+2.90/16 8.8s}
h5 {-0.62/12 28s} 12. Rh1 {+2.27/20 83s} Bh4+ {-0.25/12 22s}
13. g3 {+3.09/16 8.0s} P@e3+ {-0.56/13 27s} 14. Kxe3 {+3.57/18 8.1s}
Bxg3 {-1.57/14 26s} 15. Qg1 {+3.64/21 55s} Qf6 {-1.53/12 24s}
16. Nf1 {+3.83/20 45s} Bh4 {-1.11/11 23s} 17. Nxh4 {+3.75/20 22s}
Qxh4 {-2.85/10 21s} 18. N@f3 {+4.43/19 11s} Qe7 {-3.53/11 22s}
19. Qxg7 {+5.64/17 12s} Qf8 {-5.04/10 21s} 20. Qxf8+ {+5.81/16 8.1s}
Rxf8 {-2.73/11 20s} 21. P@g2 {+5.91/17 43s} e5 {-1.27/9 19s}
22. Q@e2 {+6.00/16 24s} N@f4 {+0.78/9 12s} 23. dxe5 {+5.74/17 29s}
Nxe2 {+0.19/9 18s} 24. Kxe2 {+5.90/17 32s} P@g4 {-0.02/9 13s}
25. Ne1 {+6.88/16 23s} Nxe5 {-2.65/9 16s} 26. N@g7+ {+M21/17 49s}
Kd8 {-0.57/10 14s} 27. B@f6+ {+4.87/19 45s} Kc8 {-1.49/11 15s}
28. Bxe5 {+5.91/17 25s} dxe5 {+0.90/9 15s} 29. P@e7 {+7.23/17 38s}
P@f3+ {+1.03/7 14s} 30. Kd1 {+6.14/16 35s} B@e2+ {+9.34/8 11s}
31. Bxe2 {+1.01/16 22s} fxe2+ {+9.64/8 13s} 32. Kxe2 {-M26/16 15s}
Bb5+ {+7.59/8 13s} 33. c4 {-M20/20 16s} Bxc4+ {+11.45/8 10s}
34. N@d3 {-M12/20 12s, Black wins by adjudication} 0-1
Stockfish announces mate in 21 at move 26th, next move the eval is +4.87 only and keeps going down.
Top

Return to “Computer Chess Club: General Topics”