Strelka again

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

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, bob, hgm

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Uri Blass
Posts: 8796
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 11:37 pm
Location: Tel-Aviv Israel

Re: Strelka again

Post by Uri Blass » Fri May 11, 2007 9:16 pm

cooldalek wrote:Basically it shows a very sad side of a lot of people here

A lot of people actually WANTED strelka to be a clone so they can go on worshipping Rynka

I feel for the authorl. He may have been planning on going commercial and his reputation has been damaged
I disagree here.
If the author wanted to go commercial then he could sell the first version and not give it for free.

There are a lot of commercial programs that are weaker than his program.

His repuration has been demaged?
I strongly disagree.

Nobody except few readers of some forums know about the claims that his program is a clone and I believe that now most of these readers believe that it is not a clone.

Uri

Zlaire

Re: Strelka again

Post by Zlaire » Fri May 11, 2007 9:53 pm

cooldalek wrote:I feel for the authorl. He may have been planning on going commercial and his reputation has been damaged
Rybka was accused of being a clone when it came too, didn't hurt it that much it seems. In my opinion it is much better to get rid of the suspicions quickly than have it dragged out over a longer period.

If noone verified Strelka like this, there would still be rumors and that would hurt the reputation much more.

Less than a week's discussion will be forgotten in a month or less (if we indeed get the final verification like I hope for).

Guetti

Re: Strelka again

Post by Guetti » Fri May 11, 2007 10:01 pm

ernst wrote:It takes two source codes to compare.
It seems I'm not the only person who wondered about that.
If there is doubt whether it is a Rybka clone, why show the sources to Dann and Bryan instead of Vasik?

Nid Hogge

Re: Strelka again

Post by Nid Hogge » Fri May 11, 2007 10:30 pm

Guetti wrote:
ernst wrote:It takes two source codes to compare.
It seems I'm not the only person who wondered about that.
If there is doubt whether it is a Rybka clone, why show the sources to Dann and Bryan instead of Vasik?
I saw somewhere that Bryan Hoffman has the source code of Rybka because he compiled them. So he could compare them I guess.
However if not than I agree. Vasik can recgonize his own creation. :wink:

Bryan Hofmann

Re: Strelka again

Post by Bryan Hofmann » Fri May 11, 2007 10:32 pm

Sergei Markoff wrote:I have sent messages to Bryan Hoffmann and Dann Corbit offering them to be the experts. Yury Osipov give me a permission to do with his sources everything what I want. He is really depressed with this story. I hope he will not stop his work after such a "greeting" from the community.
First I want to thank Sergei and Yury for confidence in me with this offer. I have accepted and will also be creating compiles for these chess engines.



Bryan

"Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." -- Abraham Lincoln

User avatar
GenoM
Posts: 910
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:46 pm
Location: Plovdiv, Bulgaria
Contact:

Re: Strelka again

Post by GenoM » Sat May 12, 2007 12:21 am

Alexander Schmidt wrote:<...>I didn't follow the discussions from the beginning, I saw Eduard Nemeths positions, most of them had to do with underpromotion. You cant take 4 positions with underpromotions as 4 hints. It's 1 hint. Strelka and Rybka Beta don`t know underpromotion. Thats all. <...>
who said Strelka doesnt know underpromotion?
look at this:

[Event "strelka_gauntlet-2"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2007.05.11"]
[Round "1.15"]
[White "Strelka v.1.0.beta"]
[Black "Toga II 1.3x4"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A11"]
[Annotator "0.26;0.43"]
[PlyCount "144"]
[EventDate "2007.05.09"]
[EventType "simul"]
[Source "Manev"]
[TimeControl "40/240:30/120:60"]

{Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.00GHz 1993 MHz W=15.4 ply; 672kN/s;
Salvo's8moves.ctg B=16.6 ply; 429kN/s; Salvo's8moves.ctg} 1. g3 {B/0 0} d5 {
B/0 0} 2. Nf3 {B/0 0} Nf6 {B/0 0} 3. Bg2 {B/0 0} Bf5 {B/0 0} 4. d3 {B/0 0} h6 {
B/0 0} 5. O-O {B/0 0} e6 {B/0 0} 6. c4 {B/0 0} c6 {B/0 0} 7. cxd5 {B/0 0} exd5
{B/0 0} 8. Be3 {B/0 0} Be7 {B/0 0} 9. Qb3 {0.26/11 5} Qd7 {(Bc8) 0.43/12 8} 10.
Nc3 {(Nd4) 0.19/11 8} O-O {0.20/12 7} 11. Rac1 {(d4) 0.15/11 8} Na6 {
(Bd6) 0.18/11 4} 12. Bd4 {0.23/12 15} Rfb8 {(Be6) 0.15/11 7} 13. Ne5 {0.31/11 5
} Qe8 {0.08/11 7} 14. e4 {0.25/11 4} Bc5 {0.22/11 5} 15. Nxf7 {(exf5) 0.18/12 9
} Qxf7 {-0.09/10 5} 16. Bxf6 {0.27/12 2} Qxf6 {-0.22/11 7} 17. exf5 {0.22/12 4}
Qxf5 {-0.12/11 7} 18. Rcd1 {(Nd1) 0.27/12 5} Nc7 {(Bd4) -0.29/11 10} 19. d4 {
0.31/12 4} Bb6 {-0.12/11 5} 20. Na4 {(Rfe1) 0.28/12 6} Nb5 {(Ba5) -0.02/12 13}
21. Nxb6 {0.40/14 9} axb6 {-0.07/11 3} 22. a4 {0.33/14 19} Nd6 {-0.20/13 8} 23.
Qb4 {0.31/13 7} Qf6 {(Qd7) -0.08/12 6} 24. b3 {0.75/13 5} Re8 {0.00/12 6} 25.
Qxb6 {0.77/12 2} Re2 {0.11/12 5} 26. Qb4 {(f4) 0.80/13 12} Rae8 {0.19/11 8} 27.
Rd2 {(a5) 0.75/12 7} R8e7 {(Re1) 0.15/12 12} 28. a5 {0.86/13 9} Re8 {0.18/12 8}
29. f4 {(Rdd1) 0.77/13 9} Nf5 {(R8e3) 0.12/12 6} 30. Rxe2 {0.78/12 2} Rxe2 {
0.21/12 8} 31. Bf3 {0.00/12 6} Ra2 {-0.30/12 10} 32. Rf2 {0.00/13 6} Ra1+ {
-0.58/12 9} 33. Rf1 {-0.99/14 11} Qxd4+ {-0.81/13 8} 34. Qxd4 {-1.19/18 6}
Rxf1+ {-0.80/14 2} 35. Kxf1 {-1.17/20 6} Nxd4 {-0.77/16 3} 36. Bd1 {-1.24/17 5}
c5 {-0.87/17 10} 37. Ke1 {-1.26/17 9} Kf7 {-1.25/17 9} 38. Kd2 {-1.23/17 7} Ke6
{-1.22/17 9} 39. Kc3 {-1.41/17 12} Kd6 {-1.22/17 10} 40. Kb2 {(Bh5) -1.47/19 14
} Nc6 {-1.29/19 9} 41. a6 {-1.47/18 3} bxa6 {-1.23/16 3} 42. Be2 {-1.50/17 3}
a5 {-1.30/17 3} 43. Kc3 {-1.50/16 2} Nd4 {-1.29/16 5} 44. Bd3 {-1.50/16 4} h5 {
(Ke7) -1.48/15 3} 45. Bf1 {(Kb2) -1.56/15 5} Nf3 {(h4) -1.55/15 3} 46. h3 {
(h4) -1.60/16 4} Nd4 {-1.70/15 4} 47. Ba6 {-1.78/17 3} h4 {-1.89/16 4} 48. gxh4
{-1.86/16 1} Ne6 {-2.02/17 4} 49. f5 {-1.93/16 2} Nf4 {-1.96/16 4} 50. Bc8 {
(f6) -2.04/16 3} Ke5 {-2.09/15 3} 51. Kc2 {(Kd2) -2.25/16 5} Ng2 {-2.20/16 3}
52. h5 {-2.46/16 2} Nf4 {-2.35/16 4} 53. Kd2 {(f6) -2.70/15 4} Nxh5 {-2.64/16 3
} 54. Bd7 {-3.11/15 4} Ng3 {-2.70/16 4} 55. Kc3 {(Kd3) -3.21/16 4} Nxf5 {
-2.74/15 3} 56. Bb5 {(Bc6) -3.24/15 2} Nd6 {-3.16/16 4} 57. Bd7 {
(Bc6) -3.41/15 2} Ne4+ {-3.47/15 3} 58. Kc2 {-3.82/16 2} Kd4 {-3.48/18 5} 59.
Bc6 {(Kb2) -3.88/17 2} c4 {(Nf2) -4.05/16 4} 60. bxc4 {(Ba8) -4.02/14 1} dxc4 {
(Kxc4) -4.29/16 5} 61. Be8 {(h4) -4.18/16 2} Nc5 {-5.28/18 5} 62. Bg6 {
(Bh5) -4.24/17 2} a4 {-6.50/18 4} 63. Kb1 {-5.23/19 4} c3 {-10.23/17 8} 64. Bc2
{-5.29/18 2} Ke3 {-10.12/19 3} 65. Kc1 {(Ka2) -11.58/20 8} Nd3+ {-13.67/17 5}
66. Kb1 {(Kd1) 0.01/1 0} a3 {-11.52/14 5} 67. Ka1 {(Bb3) 0.01/1 0} Nb4 {
-#8/14 6} 68. h4 {(Kb1) 0.01/1 0} Kd2 {-#6/18 3} 69. h5 {(Bb3) 0.01/1 0} Kxc2 {
-#4/45 4} 70. h6 {0.01/1 0} Kd2 {-#3/63 3} 71. hxg7 {0.01/1 0} c2 {-#2/33 0}
72. g8=N {(g8Q) 0.01/1 0} c1=Q# {-#1/63 1} 0-1
take it easy :)

User avatar
Thomas Mayer
Posts: 383
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:45 pm
Location: Nellmersbach, Germany

Re: Strelka again

Post by Thomas Mayer » Sat May 12, 2007 12:52 am

Hi Evgenii,
GenoM wrote:who said Strelka doesnt know underpromotion?
look at this:

[... Strelka game ...]
can you reproduce that ? Because I can't so far, I tried not only this game but a lot of other underpromotion positions. Is it possible that something went wrong there within Fritz GUI ?

Greets, Thomas

swami
Posts: 6546
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:21 am

Re: Strelka again

Post by swami » Sat May 12, 2007 4:35 am

Sorry to say it but I find things like this rather silly. If people come with claims, just prove them wrong and get on with it, just like happened here. I'm very happy Strelka seems to turn out to be a genuine engine, and I'm sure everyone else here is.
There are still people who suspected strelka of being a clone by offering many reasons behind suspicions,remember that they didn't thank the author for the engine and they didn't critisice it politely,and still they didn't apologize to the author for accusing it or even suspecting it as a clone after it turns out that strelka is not a clone,the author should get credit for this freeware strong engine,Most of them who suspected the engine as a clone apologized,there are still some of them left.

cooldalek

Re: Strelka again

Post by cooldalek » Sat May 12, 2007 6:29 am

Personally, I'm not quite sure why accusations that something is a clone (without any foundation) and besmirching someone's reputation doesn't get you at least a temporary ban from this board.

If that happened, perhaps people would think twice before making such claims

I am pleased there is now a thread where a load of people are eating humble pie. But does that make up for the author feeling low and upset all the last week?

We need to stop unfounded accusations. I recommend all those who falsely accused are given a 1 week ban

User avatar
Graham Banks
Posts: 34543
Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: Strelka again

Post by Graham Banks » Sat May 12, 2007 6:38 am

cooldalek wrote:Personally, I'm not quite sure why accusations that something is a clone (without any foundation) and besmirching someone's reputation doesn't get you at least a temporary ban from this board.

If that happened, perhaps people would think twice before making such claims

I am pleased there is now a thread where a load of people are eating humble pie. But does that make up for the author feeling low and upset all the last week?

We need to stop unfounded accusations. I recommend all those who falsely accused are given a 1 week ban
Hopefully many have learnt a valuable lesson through this and will not be as quick to cast aspersions so readily in future cases.

Regards, Graham.

Post Reply