Et Mortuus Est Rex

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi,

The title is in Latin and it means The Dead King ....

I started a series of chess tournaments playing the chess engines rated in the CCRL from 2400 Elo and higher ....

Each tournament consists of 7 engines and myself playing 2 games against each other ....

The first engine I played is Simplex 0.9.8 x64 running on my i9 overclocked monster PC ....

Time control is 40 minutes + 20 seconds increment ....

The only advantage I use against the engines is that I am not entitled to the above mentioned time control meaning that my thinking time is infinite but usually I think around 2-5 minutes on a single move ....

Simplex 0.9.8 went down in the 2 games

Note that I steer the chess engine to a specific opening line that is comfortable for me,in this case the Hedgehog of the Symmetrical English which I am pretty much familiar with also when I play the Sicilian Kan variation ....

Here I tricked Simplex to take the pawn on the b6 square with it's queen drafting it away from the white kingside ....

It was a risk and somehow I bluffed but it played along as I generally anticipated ....

All in all Simplex is a good playing chess program but it lacks tactical abilities and has a noticeable problems with positional understanding of the game ....

The game is annotated by Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 ....

Enjoy ....


[pgn][Event "Et Mortuus Est Rex"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.06.27"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Simplex 0.9.8 x64 q"]
[Black "Dr.Deeb"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[WhiteElo "2400"]
[BlackElo "2032"]
[Annotator "Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 x64 (40m)"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]

{A30: Symmetrical English: Double Fianchetto and Hedgehog} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. b3 O-O 10.
Bb2 a6 11. Rfd1 Nbd7 12. e4 Qc7 13. Qe3 Rfe8 14. Nd4 Bf8 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. h3 {
last book move. Black has a cramped position} Nc5 {Will e4 fall?. Black
threatens to win material: Nc5xe4} 17. Re1 g6 {Black has a cramped position}
18. Rad1 Red8 19. Re2 Bg7 20. Qe3 h5 21. Red2 e5 {Black threatens to win
material: e5xd4} 22. Nc2 Qe7 {White has an active position} (22... Kh7 23. g4
$11) 23. b4 $14 {White threatens to win material: b4xc5} Ne6 24. Nd5 Nxd5 25.
cxd5 Nf8 26. Qxb6 Rc7 27. Ne3 (27. b5 Rdc8 28. bxa6 Nd7 $16) 27... Rdc8 28. Bf3
Nd7 {Black threatens to win material: Nd7xb6} 29. Qa5 Bh6 30. Re1 h4 {White
has an active position} 31. Bg4 (31. Bg2 $5 $14 {has some apparent merit})
31... hxg3 $11 32. fxg3 Bxe3+ 33. Rxe3 {White has the pair of bishops} Qg5 {
Black threatens to win material: Qg5xe3} 34. Rdd3 f5 35. exf5 (35. Bd1 Nf6 36.
h4 Qh6 37. exf5 gxf5 $15) 35... gxf5 (35... Rc2 $5 36. Ba3 Rxa2 $19) 36. Bd1
$15 Nf6 37. Ra3 $2 (37. Re2 $142 {is a viable option} f4 38. Qa3 $15) 37... f4
$19 38. Re1 $2 (38. Rf3 Qg6 39. b5 Qb1 40. bxa6 Bxd5 $19 (40... Qxb2 $6 41.
Rad3 Ba8 42. Rf2 $19) (40... Qxd1+ 41. Rf1 Qe2 42. axb7 Rxb7 43. Bd4 $19))
38... fxg3 (38... Rh7 $142 {secures the win} 39. Re2 Rxh3 $19) 39. Be2 $4 {
but even a better move would not have saved the game} (39. b5 Qh4 40. Qd2 Qxh3
41. Qg2 Qxg2+ 42. Kxg2 Bxd5+ 43. Kg1 $19) 39... Qd2 0-1[/pgn]

[lkaufman]

Hi,

The title is in Latin and it means The Dead King ....

I started a series of chess tournaments playing the chess engines rated in the CCRL from 2400 Elo and higher ....

Each tournament consists of 7 engines and myself playing 2 games against each other ....

The first engine I played is Simplex 0.9.8 x64 running on my i9 overclocked monster PC ....

Time control is 40 minutes + 20 seconds increment ....

The only advantage I use against the engines is that I am not entitled to the above mentioned time control meaning that my thinking time is infinite but usually I think around 2-5 minutes on a single move ....

Simplex 0.9.8 went down in the 2 games

Note that I steer the chess engine to a specific opening line that is comfortable for me,in this case the Hedgehog of the Symmetrical English which I am pretty much familiar with also when I play the Sicilian Kan variation ....

Here I tricked Simplex to take the pawn on the b6 square with it's queen drafting it away from the white kingside ....

It was a risk and somehow I bluffed but it played along as I generally anticipated ....

All in all Simplex is a good playing chess program but it lacks tactical abilities and has a noticeable problems with positional understanding of the game ....

The game is annotated by Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 ....

Enjoy ....


[pgn][Event "Et Mortuus Est Rex"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.06.27"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Simplex 0.9.8 x64 q"]
[Black "Dr.Deeb"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[WhiteElo "2400"]
[BlackElo "2032"]
[Annotator "Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 x64 (40m)"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]

{A30: Symmetrical English: Double Fianchetto and Hedgehog} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. b3 O-O 10.
Bb2 a6 11. Rfd1 Nbd7 12. e4 Qc7 13. Qe3 Rfe8 14. Nd4 Bf8 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. h3 {
last book move. Black has a cramped position} Nc5 {Will e4 fall?. Black
threatens to win material: Nc5xe4} 17. Re1 g6 {Black has a cramped position}
18. Rad1 Red8 19. Re2 Bg7 20. Qe3 h5 21. Red2 e5 {Black threatens to win
material: e5xd4} 22. Nc2 Qe7 {White has an active position} (22... Kh7 23. g4
$11) 23. b4 $14 {White threatens to win material: b4xc5} Ne6 24. Nd5 Nxd5 25.
cxd5 Nf8 26. Qxb6 Rc7 27. Ne3 (27. b5 Rdc8 28. bxa6 Nd7 $16) 27... Rdc8 28. Bf3
Nd7 {Black threatens to win material: Nd7xb6} 29. Qa5 Bh6 30. Re1 h4 {White
has an active position} 31. Bg4 (31. Bg2 $5 $14 {has some apparent merit})
31... hxg3 $11 32. fxg3 Bxe3+ 33. Rxe3 {White has the pair of bishops} Qg5 {
Black threatens to win material: Qg5xe3} 34. Rdd3 f5 35. exf5 (35. Bd1 Nf6 36.
h4 Qh6 37. exf5 gxf5 $15) 35... gxf5 (35... Rc2 $5 36. Ba3 Rxa2 $19) 36. Bd1
$15 Nf6 37. Ra3 $2 (37. Re2 $142 {is a viable option} f4 38. Qa3 $15) 37... f4
$19 38. Re1 $2 (38. Rf3 Qg6 39. b5 Qb1 40. bxa6 Bxd5 $19 (40... Qxb2 $6 41.
Rad3 Ba8 42. Rf2 $19) (40... Qxd1+ 41. Rf1 Qe2 42. axb7 Rxb7 43. Bd4 $19))
38... fxg3 (38... Rh7 $142 {secures the win} 39. Re2 Rxh3 $19) 39. Be2 $4 {
but even a better move would not have saved the game} (39. b5 Qh4 40. Qd2 Qxh3
41. Qg2 Qxg2+ 42. Kxg2 Bxd5+ 43. Kg1 $19) 39... Qd2 0-1[/pgn]

It would be helpful to know your own Elo rating (over the board, if you have one, online if you don't) so that these games might shed some light on the accuracy of the CCRL ratings in human terms. If you are not close to 2400, and if you continue to score well against engines over 2400 then we need to figure out why the engines are rated that highly, when we know that the reference engines are under-rated. Also how many threads are they running on? This should offset the time odds factor.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi,

The title is in Latin and it means The Dead King ....

I started a series of chess tournaments playing the chess engines rated in the CCRL from 2400 Elo and higher ....

Each tournament consists of 7 engines and myself playing 2 games against each other ....

The first engine I played is Simplex 0.9.8 x64 running on my i9 overclocked monster PC ....

Time control is 40 minutes + 20 seconds increment ....

The only advantage I use against the engines is that I am not entitled to the above mentioned time control meaning that my thinking time is infinite but usually I think around 2-5 minutes on a single move ....

Simplex 0.9.8 went down in the 2 games

Note that I steer the chess engine to a specific opening line that is comfortable for me,in this case the Hedgehog of the Symmetrical English which I am pretty much familiar with also when I play the Sicilian Kan variation ....

Here I tricked Simplex to take the pawn on the b6 square with it's queen drafting it away from the white kingside ....

It was a risk and somehow I bluffed but it played along as I generally anticipated ....

All in all Simplex is a good playing chess program but it lacks tactical abilities and has a noticeable problems with positional understanding of the game ....

The game is annotated by Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 ....

Enjoy ....


[pgn][Event "Et Mortuus Est Rex"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.06.27"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Simplex 0.9.8 x64 q"]
[Black "Dr.Deeb"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[WhiteElo "2400"]
[BlackElo "2032"]
[Annotator "Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 x64 (40m)"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]

{A30: Symmetrical English: Double Fianchetto and Hedgehog} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. b3 O-O 10.
Bb2 a6 11. Rfd1 Nbd7 12. e4 Qc7 13. Qe3 Rfe8 14. Nd4 Bf8 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. h3 {
last book move. Black has a cramped position} Nc5 {Will e4 fall?. Black
threatens to win material: Nc5xe4} 17. Re1 g6 {Black has a cramped position}
18. Rad1 Red8 19. Re2 Bg7 20. Qe3 h5 21. Red2 e5 {Black threatens to win
material: e5xd4} 22. Nc2 Qe7 {White has an active position} (22... Kh7 23. g4
$11) 23. b4 $14 {White threatens to win material: b4xc5} Ne6 24. Nd5 Nxd5 25.
cxd5 Nf8 26. Qxb6 Rc7 27. Ne3 (27. b5 Rdc8 28. bxa6 Nd7 $16) 27... Rdc8 28. Bf3
Nd7 {Black threatens to win material: Nd7xb6} 29. Qa5 Bh6 30. Re1 h4 {White
has an active position} 31. Bg4 (31. Bg2 $5 $14 {has some apparent merit})
31... hxg3 $11 32. fxg3 Bxe3+ 33. Rxe3 {White has the pair of bishops} Qg5 {
Black threatens to win material: Qg5xe3} 34. Rdd3 f5 35. exf5 (35. Bd1 Nf6 36.
h4 Qh6 37. exf5 gxf5 $15) 35... gxf5 (35... Rc2 $5 36. Ba3 Rxa2 $19) 36. Bd1
$15 Nf6 37. Ra3 $2 (37. Re2 $142 {is a viable option} f4 38. Qa3 $15) 37... f4
$19 38. Re1 $2 (38. Rf3 Qg6 39. b5 Qb1 40. bxa6 Bxd5 $19 (40... Qxb2 $6 41.
Rad3 Ba8 42. Rf2 $19) (40... Qxd1+ 41. Rf1 Qe2 42. axb7 Rxb7 43. Bd4 $19))
38... fxg3 (38... Rh7 $142 {secures the win} 39. Re2 Rxh3 $19) 39. Be2 $4 {
but even a better move would not have saved the game} (39. b5 Qh4 40. Qd2 Qxh3
41. Qg2 Qxg2+ 42. Kxg2 Bxd5+ 43. Kg1 $19) 39... Qd2 0-1[/pgn]

It would be helpful to know your own Elo rating (over the board, if you have one, online if you don't) so that these games might shed some light on the accuracy of the CCRL ratings in human terms. If you are not close to 2400, and if you continue to score well against engines over 2400 then we need to figure out why the engines are rated that highly, when we know that the reference engines are under-rated. Also how many threads are they running on? This should offset the time odds factor.

Hi Larry,

Unfortunately I don't have OTB rating nor an online one ....
I started playing chess and became very interested back in Bulgaria when I was a student in the medical university ....

Due to my professional occupation I've never had the chance to become OTB chess player so I dedicated the little time I have to self education and playing against the chess engines ....

In human terms,you will never know the accuracy of a rating list being CCRL or any rating pool in that matter if you don't engage a human to play the engines ....

As a rough estimation I consider myself playing around the 2200 Elo so Simplex is definitely not a 2400 Elo chess engine and is quite possible highly overrated....

Note how I managed to hijack it's queen to take the pawn on the b6 square and it stayed there while the white king encountered a vicious attack ending the game in black favorite ....

I hope to play enough games climbing the CCRL rating list to gather at least a slight data regarding the chess engines versus the humans ....

Regarding the my hardware it's an Intel® Core™ i9-9900K Processor running a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and with a help of a friend of mine we managed to overclock it to 4.8 GHz so it's quite powerful ....

I let the chess engines use 8 threads when possible with 2048 ram memory ....

I have my own rating list which I started to rebuild recently but I didn't include myself in it,just chess engines

Cheers,
Dr.D

[Ovyron]

Thanks for sharing! This idea is very interesting and much better than seeing how much material can be taken off the top engines in handicap matches.

I like this novel concept of "the human gets infinite time and takes as much time as they need" and I'm looking forward to how far you can go.

[lkaufman]

Hi,

The title is in Latin and it means The Dead King ....

I started a series of chess tournaments playing the chess engines rated in the CCRL from 2400 Elo and higher ....

Each tournament consists of 7 engines and myself playing 2 games against each other ....

The first engine I played is Simplex 0.9.8 x64 running on my i9 overclocked monster PC ....

Time control is 40 minutes + 20 seconds increment ....

The only advantage I use against the engines is that I am not entitled to the above mentioned time control meaning that my thinking time is infinite but usually I think around 2-5 minutes on a single move ....

Simplex 0.9.8 went down in the 2 games

Note that I steer the chess engine to a specific opening line that is comfortable for me,in this case the Hedgehog of the Symmetrical English which I am pretty much familiar with also when I play the Sicilian Kan variation ....

Here I tricked Simplex to take the pawn on the b6 square with it's queen drafting it away from the white kingside ....

It was a risk and somehow I bluffed but it played along as I generally anticipated ....

All in all Simplex is a good playing chess program but it lacks tactical abilities and has a noticeable problems with positional understanding of the game ....

The game is annotated by Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 ....

Enjoy ....


[pgn][Event "Et Mortuus Est Rex"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.06.27"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Simplex 0.9.8 x64 q"]
[Black "Dr.Deeb"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[WhiteElo "2400"]
[BlackElo "2032"]
[Annotator "Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 x64 (40m)"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]

{A30: Symmetrical English: Double Fianchetto and Hedgehog} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. b3 O-O 10.
Bb2 a6 11. Rfd1 Nbd7 12. e4 Qc7 13. Qe3 Rfe8 14. Nd4 Bf8 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. h3 {
last book move. Black has a cramped position} Nc5 {Will e4 fall?. Black
threatens to win material: Nc5xe4} 17. Re1 g6 {Black has a cramped position}
18. Rad1 Red8 19. Re2 Bg7 20. Qe3 h5 21. Red2 e5 {Black threatens to win
material: e5xd4} 22. Nc2 Qe7 {White has an active position} (22... Kh7 23. g4
$11) 23. b4 $14 {White threatens to win material: b4xc5} Ne6 24. Nd5 Nxd5 25.
cxd5 Nf8 26. Qxb6 Rc7 27. Ne3 (27. b5 Rdc8 28. bxa6 Nd7 $16) 27... Rdc8 28. Bf3
Nd7 {Black threatens to win material: Nd7xb6} 29. Qa5 Bh6 30. Re1 h4 {White
has an active position} 31. Bg4 (31. Bg2 $5 $14 {has some apparent merit})
31... hxg3 $11 32. fxg3 Bxe3+ 33. Rxe3 {White has the pair of bishops} Qg5 {
Black threatens to win material: Qg5xe3} 34. Rdd3 f5 35. exf5 (35. Bd1 Nf6 36.
h4 Qh6 37. exf5 gxf5 $15) 35... gxf5 (35... Rc2 $5 36. Ba3 Rxa2 $19) 36. Bd1
$15 Nf6 37. Ra3 $2 (37. Re2 $142 {is a viable option} f4 38. Qa3 $15) 37... f4
$19 38. Re1 $2 (38. Rf3 Qg6 39. b5 Qb1 40. bxa6 Bxd5 $19 (40... Qxb2 $6 41.
Rad3 Ba8 42. Rf2 $19) (40... Qxd1+ 41. Rf1 Qe2 42. axb7 Rxb7 43. Bd4 $19))
38... fxg3 (38... Rh7 $142 {secures the win} 39. Re2 Rxh3 $19) 39. Be2 $4 {
but even a better move would not have saved the game} (39. b5 Qh4 40. Qd2 Qxh3
41. Qg2 Qxg2+ 42. Kxg2 Bxd5+ 43. Kg1 $19) 39... Qd2 0-1[/pgn]

It would be helpful to know your own Elo rating (over the board, if you have one, online if you don't) so that these games might shed some light on the accuracy of the CCRL ratings in human terms. If you are not close to 2400, and if you continue to score well against engines over 2400 then we need to figure out why the engines are rated that highly, when we know that the reference engines are under-rated. Also how many threads are they running on? This should offset the time odds factor.

Hi Larry,

Unfortunately I don't have OTB rating nor an online one ....
I started playing chess and became very interested back in Bulgaria when I was a student in the medical university ....

Due to my professional occupation I've never had the chance to become OTB chess player so I dedicated the little time I have to self education and playing against the chess engines ....

In human terms,you will never know the accuracy of a rating list being CCRL or any rating pool in that matter if you don't engage a human to play the engines ....

As a rough estimation I consider myself playing around the 2200 Elo so Simplex is definitely not a 2400 Elo chess engine and is quite possible highly overrated....

Note how I managed to hijack it's queen to take the pawn on the b6 square and it stayed there while the white king encountered a vicious attack ending the game in black favorite ....

I hope to play enough games climbing the CCRL rating list to gather at least a slight data regarding the chess engines versus the humans ....

Regarding the my hardware it's an Intel® Core™ i9-9900K Processor running a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and with a help of a friend of mine we managed to overclock it to 4.8 GHz so it's quite powerful ....

I let the chess engines use 8 threads when possible with 2048 ram memory ....

I have my own rating list which I started to rebuild recently but I didn't include myself in it,just chess engines

Cheers,
Dr.D

The Simplex engine is only listed in the CCRL list with one thread. I don't know if it is an MP engine or not. Do you know whether it was actually using your 8 threads or perhaps just 1? If it was using 8, then it's quite fair with the time handicap, but if it was using just 1, then it was a time handicap game so it wouldn't be so strange for a 2200 player to beat a 2400, still a bit surprising. Is your 2200 estimate for yourself based on engine ratings you have played, or were you actually scoring around 50% with 2200 human players in the past, even if the games were not rated? If it is based on playing engines, then it would be a paradox if you perform at say 2400 vs engines.

[carldaman]

Many engines in that 2400 CCRL (or lower) range have very serious positional weaknesses, allowing for competent anti-computer specialists to thrive against them. Tactically, those engines are much stronger than 2400, but things aren't so easy for them when the human anti-computer specialist (HACS) steers the game into his own turf.

We must keep in mind that 2400 is really just an average figure, lying somewhere between the positional ineptitude and advanced tactical strength.

A lot will depend on how the human plays against the 2400 Elo engine - a human master who normally adopts a wide-open tactical approach will not fare well, and in fact may perform worse Elo-wise than a lesser-rated non-master HACS.

In the old days of computer chess, as I'm sure you can recall, there were quite a few such HACS types, since most engines struggled positionally, and in closed positions even more so.

[lkaufman]

Many engines in that 2400 CCRL (or lower) range have very serious positional weaknesses, allowing for competent anti-computer specialists to thrive against them. Tactically, those engines are much stronger than 2400, but things aren't so easy for them when the human anti-computer specialist (HACS) steers the game into his own turf.

We must keep in mind that 2400 is really just an average figure, lying somewhere between the positional ineptitude and advanced tactical strength.

A lot will depend on how the human plays against the 2400 Elo engine - a human master who normally adopts a wide-open tactical approach will not fare well, and in fact may perform worse Elo-wise than a lesser-rated non-master HACS.

In the old days of computer chess, as I'm sure you can recall, there were quite a few such HACS types, since most engines struggled positionally, and in closed positions even more so.

Yes, I suppose this could indeed be a big factor. I had assumed that most engines rated over 2400 would be at least as good positionally as top engines of around 1990, which could play GMs close to even in Rapid on that ancient hardware, but perhaps my assumption is not valid, I don't spend time testing such engines. It was well known even thirty years ago that humans should avoid wide-open tactical play vs. engines if they want to score well, so I wouldn't even call them "HACS", just players making use of basic knowledge about their opponent's abilities.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Thanks for sharing! This idea is very interesting and much better than seeing how much material can be taken off the top engines in handicap matches.

I like this novel concept of "the human gets infinite time and takes as much time as they need" and I'm looking forward to how far you can go.

Hi,

Thanks for your comment

I am entirely against these odd material matches against the chess engines because this not a classic chess game but rather a variation of chess ....

Well,the concept of infinite time is not quite right as I play average around an hour and a half per game ....

Sometimes I get tired as a human and stop playing and then resume the game 1-2 days later ....

I play on a real tournament chess board and I hide the chess engine input ....

Yes I am also excited to how far I will go as I far as I know no one is engaged in such a project ......

Cheers,
Dr.D

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi,

The title is in Latin and it means The Dead King ....

I started a series of chess tournaments playing the chess engines rated in the CCRL from 2400 Elo and higher ....

Each tournament consists of 7 engines and myself playing 2 games against each other ....

The first engine I played is Simplex 0.9.8 x64 running on my i9 overclocked monster PC ....

Time control is 40 minutes + 20 seconds increment ....

The only advantage I use against the engines is that I am not entitled to the above mentioned time control meaning that my thinking time is infinite but usually I think around 2-5 minutes on a single move ....

Simplex 0.9.8 went down in the 2 games

Note that I steer the chess engine to a specific opening line that is comfortable for me,in this case the Hedgehog of the Symmetrical English which I am pretty much familiar with also when I play the Sicilian Kan variation ....

Here I tricked Simplex to take the pawn on the b6 square with it's queen drafting it away from the white kingside ....

It was a risk and somehow I bluffed but it played along as I generally anticipated ....

All in all Simplex is a good playing chess program but it lacks tactical abilities and has a noticeable problems with positional understanding of the game ....

The game is annotated by Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 ....

Enjoy ....


[pgn][Event "Et Mortuus Est Rex"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2020.06.27"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Simplex 0.9.8 x64 q"]
[Black "Dr.Deeb"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A30"]
[WhiteElo "2400"]
[BlackElo "2032"]
[Annotator "Deep Rybka 4.1 SSE42 x64 (40m)"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[EventDate "2020.??.??"]

{A30: Symmetrical English: Double Fianchetto and Hedgehog} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. c4 e6
3. Nc3 c5 4. g3 b6 5. Bg2 Bb7 6. O-O Be7 7. d4 cxd4 8. Qxd4 d6 9. b3 O-O 10.
Bb2 a6 11. Rfd1 Nbd7 12. e4 Qc7 13. Qe3 Rfe8 14. Nd4 Bf8 15. Qd2 Rac8 16. h3 {
last book move. Black has a cramped position} Nc5 {Will e4 fall?. Black
threatens to win material: Nc5xe4} 17. Re1 g6 {Black has a cramped position}
18. Rad1 Red8 19. Re2 Bg7 20. Qe3 h5 21. Red2 e5 {Black threatens to win
material: e5xd4} 22. Nc2 Qe7 {White has an active position} (22... Kh7 23. g4
$11) 23. b4 $14 {White threatens to win material: b4xc5} Ne6 24. Nd5 Nxd5 25.
cxd5 Nf8 26. Qxb6 Rc7 27. Ne3 (27. b5 Rdc8 28. bxa6 Nd7 $16) 27... Rdc8 28. Bf3
Nd7 {Black threatens to win material: Nd7xb6} 29. Qa5 Bh6 30. Re1 h4 {White
has an active position} 31. Bg4 (31. Bg2 $5 $14 {has some apparent merit})
31... hxg3 $11 32. fxg3 Bxe3+ 33. Rxe3 {White has the pair of bishops} Qg5 {
Black threatens to win material: Qg5xe3} 34. Rdd3 f5 35. exf5 (35. Bd1 Nf6 36.
h4 Qh6 37. exf5 gxf5 $15) 35... gxf5 (35... Rc2 $5 36. Ba3 Rxa2 $19) 36. Bd1
$15 Nf6 37. Ra3 $2 (37. Re2 $142 {is a viable option} f4 38. Qa3 $15) 37... f4
$19 38. Re1 $2 (38. Rf3 Qg6 39. b5 Qb1 40. bxa6 Bxd5 $19 (40... Qxb2 $6 41.
Rad3 Ba8 42. Rf2 $19) (40... Qxd1+ 41. Rf1 Qe2 42. axb7 Rxb7 43. Bd4 $19))
38... fxg3 (38... Rh7 $142 {secures the win} 39. Re2 Rxh3 $19) 39. Be2 $4 {
but even a better move would not have saved the game} (39. b5 Qh4 40. Qd2 Qxh3
41. Qg2 Qxg2+ 42. Kxg2 Bxd5+ 43. Kg1 $19) 39... Qd2 0-1[/pgn]

It would be helpful to know your own Elo rating (over the board, if you have one, online if you don't) so that these games might shed some light on the accuracy of the CCRL ratings in human terms. If you are not close to 2400, and if you continue to score well against engines over 2400 then we need to figure out why the engines are rated that highly, when we know that the reference engines are under-rated. Also how many threads are they running on? This should offset the time odds factor.

Hi Larry,

Unfortunately I don't have OTB rating nor an online one ....
I started playing chess and became very interested back in Bulgaria when I was a student in the medical university ....

Due to my professional occupation I've never had the chance to become OTB chess player so I dedicated the little time I have to self education and playing against the chess engines ....

In human terms,you will never know the accuracy of a rating list being CCRL or any rating pool in that matter if you don't engage a human to play the engines ....

As a rough estimation I consider myself playing around the 2200 Elo so Simplex is definitely not a 2400 Elo chess engine and is quite possible highly overrated....

Note how I managed to hijack it's queen to take the pawn on the b6 square and it stayed there while the white king encountered a vicious attack ending the game in black favorite ....

I hope to play enough games climbing the CCRL rating list to gather at least a slight data regarding the chess engines versus the humans ....

Regarding the my hardware it's an Intel® Core™ i9-9900K Processor running a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and with a help of a friend of mine we managed to overclock it to 4.8 GHz so it's quite powerful ....

I let the chess engines use 8 threads when possible with 2048 ram memory ....

I have my own rating list which I started to rebuild recently but I didn't include myself in it,just chess engines

Cheers,
Dr.D

The Simplex engine is only listed in the CCRL list with one thread. I don't know if it is an MP engine or not. Do you know whether it was actually using your 8 threads or perhaps just 1? If it was using 8, then it's quite fair with the time handicap, but if it was using just 1, then it was a time handicap game so it wouldn't be so strange for a 2200 player to beat a 2400, still a bit surprising. Is your 2200 estimate for yourself based on engine ratings you have played, or were you actually scoring around 50% with 2200 human players in the past, even if the games were not rated? If it is based on playing engines, then it would be a paradox if you perform at say 2400 vs engines.

Hi Larry

Simplex is one thread chess engine but again it run on a powerful i9 processor overclocked to 4.8 GHz with 2048 Mb hash table ...

The length of the game is around one hour for the engine which is already playing it's first move after a 12 moves opening line ....

Well,my 2200 estimation is purely based on playing the chess engines starting from a 1800 Elo and using the FIDE chess rating calculator ....

Note until the year 2016 I played a 980 games against various chess engines and studied a lot certain opening lines and middle game techniques when I had the time ....

Anyways,we'll see what happens next as I play the next rated chess engine in the CCRL rating : Tigran 2.4n x64 Which BTW I caught it in lovely Old Indian defense opening line which happens to be one of my best playing lines that I practice a lot ....

Cheers,
Dr.D

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Many engines in that 2400 CCRL (or lower) range have very serious positional weaknesses, allowing for competent anti-computer specialists to thrive against them. Tactically, those engines are much stronger than 2400, but things aren't so easy for them when the human anti-computer specialist (HACS) steers the game into his own turf.


Extremely true as this is the main factor actually that I use to thrive as you said against these monsters ...

For example,take a look at my game with Simplex playing the black pieces :
I steered the opening line toward the English opening A30 which I am quite familiar with and didn't go for a Slavian defense or queen gambit or anything of the sort ....

We must keep in mind that 2400 is really just an average figure, lying somewhere between the positional ineptitude and advanced tactical strength.

Very true ....

A lot will depend on how the human plays against the 2400 Elo engine - a human master who normally adopts a wide-open tactical approach will not fare well, and in fact may perform worse Elo-wise than a lesser-rated non-master HACS.

I didn't know that I am a non-master HACS
But again you have a valid point here ....

In the old days of computer chess, as I'm sure you can recall, there were quite a few such HACS types, since most engines struggled positionally, and in closed positions even more so.


I am not aware of such players but there was one who was always trying to close the position and force the chess engine to lose on time and then claims himself as a genius ....
Most of the members here know what I am talking about

Cheers