Page 1 of 3
Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:46 pm
by MM
Hi all,
Strelka 5' performance is impressive.
It seems a little step and it is going to overtake everyone. What do you think?
http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_4_Ra ... liste.html
Regards.
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:51 pm
by Laskos
For that to happen, it needs to overtake itself, which is roughly Houdini 1.5
Kai
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 4:55 pm
by MM
Laskos wrote:
For that to happen, it needs to overtake itself, which is roughly Houdini 1.5
Kai
Hi, i watched many games against Houdini. Well, their play is very similar but evaluation is very different, i think some important changes have been made in Strelka 5.
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:02 pm
by Laskos
MM wrote:Laskos wrote:
For that to happen, it needs to overtake itself, which is roughly Houdini 1.5
Kai
Hi, i watched many games against Houdini. Well, their play is very similar but evaluation is very different, i think some important changes have been made in Strelka 5.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... w=&start=0
Look down there on the second graph for Strelka 5. As the evaluation goes, every monotonic function is invertible.
Kai
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:22 pm
by Frank Quisinsky
Hi Kai,
the main problem from users site of view.
Most are looking in eval only and if an engines will get an other name most celebrate a new engine
Better is to compare the main variant.
After my short obsession ...
Strelka and Houdini are very comparable. Could be the same as the compare a TheKing playing style.
Best
Frank
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:22 pm
by MM
Laskos wrote:MM wrote:Laskos wrote:
For that to happen, it needs to overtake itself, which is roughly Houdini 1.5
Kai
Hi, i watched many games against Houdini. Well, their play is very similar but evaluation is very different, i think some important changes have been made in Strelka 5.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... w=&start=0
Look down there on the second graph for Strelka 5. As the evaluation goes, every monotonic function is invertible.
Kai
Yes i looked at that, my point of view is that if i buy an engine i wouldnt like to know that i bought a clone and coming back, probably i wouldnt buy it, but if i can download legally a free engine, i don't care if it is a clone of another (if this another is free).
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 5:39 pm
by MM
Frank Quisinsky wrote:Hi Kai,
the main problem from users site of view.
Most are looking in eval only and if an engines will get an other name most celebrate a new engine
Better is to compare the main variant.
After my short obsession ...
Strelka and Houdini are very comparable. Could be the same as the compare a TheKing playing style.
Best
Frank
Hi, thanks for the high quality of your site.
I don't know how many engines are 100 % original, but i think they are few. As regards the evaluation is pretty obvious that it shows nothing but a change in the function of evaluation and who (if) celebrates a new engine only for a changing evaluation should better to analyze better the other characteristics of the engine.
I don't know if Strelka is a clone of Houdini or not, and honestly i don't care, i just like watching its play against other engines (Houdini included) but i don't consider Strelka a new engine before someone shows me that it has nothing to do with houdini or other engines. I just like high quality chess.
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:11 pm
by Frank Quisinsky
Hi Maurizio,
the programmer of Strelka wrote it in text file. Kai sent a good example with comparing both engines.
If you like we can speaking in 2 years about this topic. Be sure that you can download 100 Strelka's / Ivanhoe's / Stockfish under other names. That the way computer chess goes in these days.
Interesting is only:
Can one of them produced an other style or can one of the programmers make a clone better.
Have fun with Strelka or what ever you will using!
Best
Frank
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:28 pm
by Houdini
One reason for the difference in evaluations is that Jury (purposely?) forgot to divide the output by 2 to obtain centipawns - Houdini uses 1/200 pawn units internally.
Seeing the results published on CEGT, I actually feel some sympathy for Norman's complaints about rating lists. If Strelka is readily adopted by the CEGT people, why continue to exclude Ivanhoe or Fire?
With Strelka we have an engine that is, by its author's admission, the direct result of reverse engineering Houdini 1.5. Unsurprisingly it produces identical results in move choices (see the similarity diagram) and in Elo strength (see the CEGT results).
Personally I don't mind Houdini (in whatever form) occupying all the upper ranks of the rating lists, but I'm not sure it adds to the rating list's relevance
.
Robert
Re: Extraordinary performance of Strelka 5.
Posted: Sun Oct 23, 2011 6:35 pm
by MM
Frank Quisinsky wrote:Hi Maurizio,
the programmer of Strelka wrote it in text file. Kai sent a good example with comparing both engines.
If you like we can speaking in 2 years about this topic. Be sure that you can download 100 Strelka's / Ivanhoe's / Stockfish under other names. That the way computer chess goes in these days.
Interesting is only:
Can one of them produced an other style or can one of the programmers make a clone better.
Have fun with Strelka or what ever you will using!
Best
Frank
Hi Frank,
i agree with you. If it would depend by me, i would make a severe copyright on every engine, free or not, to stop cloning but i think it is utopia.
On the other side, i think that the most important thing for the ''user'' is the strenght of the engine, so, if arrives an engine maybe cloned by another one but 150 points elo stronger, then i will use it for sure (and the same the 99.9 % of users in my opinion).
Best regards.