Naum4 - Rybka 3 - 100 games 60 min. test. After 16 games...

[Tomcass]

Thanks for your comments, Uri. But they are not, in my opinion, right. My opinion and my feelings -not conclusions!- are based in weeks of testing both programmes under different circumstances.

You says: Rybka with 50 minutes per game is suposed to be better than Naum with 60 minutes per game. Wrong. It is clear that my final figures prove the opposite. (In my Quad 6700, Fritz 11 GUI at 60 minutes game).

In a previous post you said: I have listen that Perfect15 is the best book available. This was the opinion also of other proficient poster such as Graham. Perfect15 is, also in my opinion, an excellent book. Rybka3 with Perfect15 is not able to win Naum4 with Storm. Now you said: "The only thing that your test prove is that probably Storm is a better book than Perfect15." (???).

Finally I amb testing again Naum4 and Rybka. Storm book was the winner in the serious Sedat's Books Tournament. Perfect15 did not compete there. In the fourth place there was an unknown -at least for me- book: Magnificient. In order to confirm that Naum4 does not benefit of the best book I am testing it with Magnificient, whereas Rybka3 has Perfect15. The advantage of Naum is huge. Tomorrow I will be post the final results.

Uri, I suggest you to chose a book for Rybka3. I will chose for Naum4 any other of the mentioned ones. I will test again both programs:

Quad 6700
Gui Fritz11
Ponder: Off
Books: The one you chose for Rybka3 and the one I choose for Naum4.
Game in 60 minutes.

I will be delighted to let you know the results.

By the way, the constructive disagreement, like yours, is always welcome from my side.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

[Uri Blass]

Thanks for your comments, Uri. But they are not, in my opinion, right. My opinion and my feelings -not conclusions!- are based in weeks of testing both programmes under different circumstances.

You says: Rybka with 50 minutes per game is suposed to be better than Naum with 60 minutes per game. Wrong. It is clear that my final figures prove the opposite. (In my Quad 6700, Fritz 11 GUI at 60 minutes game).

In a previous post you said: I have listen that Perfect15 is the best book available. This was the opinion also of other proficient poster such as Graham. Perfect15 is, also in my opinion, an excellent book. Rybka3 with Perfect15 is not able to win Naum4 with Storm. Now you said: "The only thing that your test prove is that probably Storm is a better book than Perfect15." (???).

Finally I amb testing again Naum4 and Rybka. Storm book was the winner in the serious Sedat's Books Tournament. Perfect15 did not compete there. In the fourth place there was an unknown -at least for me- book: Magnificient. In order to confirm that Naum4 does not benefit of the best book I am testing it with Magnificient, whereas Rybka3 has Perfect15. The advantage of Naum is huge. Tomorrow I will be post the final results.

Uri, I suggest you to chose a book for Rybka3. I will chose for Naum4 any other of the mentioned ones. I will test again both programs:

Quad 6700
Gui Fritz11
Ponder: Off
Books: The one you chose for Rybka3 and the one I choose for Naum4.
Game in 60 minutes.

I will be delighted to let you know the results.

By the way, the constructive disagreement, like yours, is always welcome from my side.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

There are some other possibilities that I did not consider that may explain Naum's advantage.

1)Rybka is relatively better in the opening stage and a big book hide this advantage when in CEGT or CCRL rybka get advantage out of the opening thanks to short opening book.

2)Naum has relatively better time management for x minutes per game and not for x minutes/40 moves when you compare time management to
rybka.

Uri

[pichy]

Thanks for your comments, Uri. But they are not, in my opinion, right. My opinion and my feelings -not conclusions!- are based in weeks of testing both programmes under different circumstances.

You says: Rybka with 50 minutes per game is suposed to be better than Naum with 60 minutes per game. Wrong. It is clear that my final figures prove the opposite. (In my Quad 6700, Fritz 11 GUI at 60 minutes game).

In a previous post you said: I have listen that Perfect15 is the best book available. This was the opinion also of other proficient poster such as Graham. Perfect15 is, also in my opinion, an excellent book. Rybka3 with Perfect15 is not able to win Naum4 with Storm. Now you said: "The only thing that your test prove is that probably Storm is a better book than Perfect15." (???).

Finally I amb testing again Naum4 and Rybka. Storm book was the winner in the serious Sedat's Books Tournament. Perfect15 did not compete there. In the fourth place there was an unknown -at least for me- book: Magnificient. In order to confirm that Naum4 does not benefit of the best book I am testing it with Magnificient, whereas Rybka3 has Perfect15. The advantage of Naum is huge. Tomorrow I will be post the final results.

Uri, I suggest you to chose a book for Rybka3. I will chose for Naum4 any other of the mentioned ones. I will test again both programs:

Quad 6700
Gui Fritz11
Ponder: Off
Books: The one you chose for Rybka3 and the one I choose for Naum4.
Game in 60 minutes.

I will be delighted to let you know the results.

By the way, the constructive disagreement, like yours, is always welcome from my side.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

Tom, I once noticed that Rybka3 does NOT benefit as much as other programs as the speed of the processor increases, I might be wrong to conclude this, but if you notice that Rybka3 on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz is almost as strong as Deep Fritz Q6600 it is NOT by pure luck.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 62&t=25472

whereas, Deep Fritz Q6600 Vs Naum Q6600 are almost equal in strength.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 03&t=25550

Now if you take either Naum4 or Fritz on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz it will NOT even come close to either Deep Fritz on Q6600 or Naum4 on Q6600.

PS: In my own Opinion program X might benefit more than program Y with certain Opening but not by much, since once the program is out of the opening most of the time it does NOT have a clue as if attacking on the right wing will benefit it more than attacking on the center or on the right wing.

[Uri Blass]

Thanks for your comments, Uri. But they are not, in my opinion, right. My opinion and my feelings -not conclusions!- are based in weeks of testing both programmes under different circumstances.

You says: Rybka with 50 minutes per game is suposed to be better than Naum with 60 minutes per game. Wrong. It is clear that my final figures prove the opposite. (In my Quad 6700, Fritz 11 GUI at 60 minutes game).

In a previous post you said: I have listen that Perfect15 is the best book available. This was the opinion also of other proficient poster such as Graham. Perfect15 is, also in my opinion, an excellent book. Rybka3 with Perfect15 is not able to win Naum4 with Storm. Now you said: "The only thing that your test prove is that probably Storm is a better book than Perfect15." (???).

Finally I amb testing again Naum4 and Rybka. Storm book was the winner in the serious Sedat's Books Tournament. Perfect15 did not compete there. In the fourth place there was an unknown -at least for me- book: Magnificient. In order to confirm that Naum4 does not benefit of the best book I am testing it with Magnificient, whereas Rybka3 has Perfect15. The advantage of Naum is huge. Tomorrow I will be post the final results.

Uri, I suggest you to chose a book for Rybka3. I will chose for Naum4 any other of the mentioned ones. I will test again both programs:

Quad 6700
Gui Fritz11
Ponder: Off
Books: The one you chose for Rybka3 and the one I choose for Naum4.
Game in 60 minutes.

I will be delighted to let you know the results.

By the way, the constructive disagreement, like yours, is always welcome from my side.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

Tom, I once noticed that Rybka3 does NOT benefit as much as other programs as the speed of the processor increases, I might be wrong to conclude this, but if you notice that Rybka3 on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz is almost as strong as Deep Fritz Q6600 it is NOT by pure luck.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 62&t=25472

whereas, Deep Fritz Q6600 Vs Naum Q6600 are almost equal in strength.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 03&t=25550

Now if you take either Naum4 or Fritz on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz it will NOT even come close to either Deep Fritz on Q6600 or Naum4 on Q6600.

PS: In my own Opinion program X might benefit more than program Y with certain Opening but not by much, since once the program is out of the opening most of the time it does NOT have a clue as if attacking on the right wing will benefit it more than attacking on the center or on the right wing.

Your second link is about Naum3.1 and not about Naum4

Naum4 is clearly stronger than Deep Fritz11

We have Deep Fritz11 Q6600=Rybka A1200=Naum3.1 Q6600 when = means 20:20 result

It does not say nothing about Naum4

Uri

[pichy]

Thanks for your comments, Uri. But they are not, in my opinion, right. My opinion and my feelings -not conclusions!- are based in weeks of testing both programmes under different circumstances.

You says: Rybka with 50 minutes per game is suposed to be better than Naum with 60 minutes per game. Wrong. It is clear that my final figures prove the opposite. (In my Quad 6700, Fritz 11 GUI at 60 minutes game).

In a previous post you said: I have listen that Perfect15 is the best book available. This was the opinion also of other proficient poster such as Graham. Perfect15 is, also in my opinion, an excellent book. Rybka3 with Perfect15 is not able to win Naum4 with Storm. Now you said: "The only thing that your test prove is that probably Storm is a better book than Perfect15." (???).

Finally I amb testing again Naum4 and Rybka. Storm book was the winner in the serious Sedat's Books Tournament. Perfect15 did not compete there. In the fourth place there was an unknown -at least for me- book: Magnificient. In order to confirm that Naum4 does not benefit of the best book I am testing it with Magnificient, whereas Rybka3 has Perfect15. The advantage of Naum is huge. Tomorrow I will be post the final results.

Uri, I suggest you to chose a book for Rybka3. I will chose for Naum4 any other of the mentioned ones. I will test again both programs:

Quad 6700
Gui Fritz11
Ponder: Off
Books: The one you chose for Rybka3 and the one I choose for Naum4.
Game in 60 minutes.

I will be delighted to let you know the results.

By the way, the constructive disagreement, like yours, is always welcome from my side.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

Tom, I once noticed that Rybka3 does NOT benefit as much as other programs as the speed of the processor increases, I might be wrong to conclude this, but if you notice that Rybka3 on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz is almost as strong as Deep Fritz Q6600 it is NOT by pure luck.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 62&t=25472

whereas, Deep Fritz Q6600 Vs Naum Q6600 are almost equal in strength.

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 03&t=25550

Now if you take either Naum4 or Fritz on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz it will NOT even come close to either Deep Fritz on Q6600 or Naum4 on Q6600.

PS: In my own Opinion program X might benefit more than program Y with certain Opening but not by much, since once the program is out of the opening most of the time it does NOT have a clue as if attacking on the right wing will benefit it more than attacking on the center or on the right wing.

Your second link is about Naum3.1 and not about Naum4

Naum4 is clearly stronger than Deep Fritz11

We have Deep Fritz11 Q6600=Rybka A1200=Naum3.1 Q6600 when = means 20:20 result

It does not say nothing about Naum4

Uri

Yes, Uri, you are correct Naum 3.1 Q6600 is NOT equal to Naum 4 Q6600, but even Naum 4 on a mere Athlon 1200 MHz can NOT perform as good as Rybka 3 on an Athlon 1200 MHz vs Deep Fritz 11 Q6600.

[Tomcass]

Comments of Jeroen Nomen to my test:

" You are seriously handicapping Rybka 3 in these matches:

Perfect15 is a much better book than RybkaII (which is already 2 years old, and probably more than 150 elo weaker).

Storm is a much better book than Perfect15, the same for Magnificent".


I think I have to start my post with the final results of my test with Jeroen's comments, which have for me the highest credibility.

FIRST 100 GAMES:

Naum4 with Perfect15 book - Rybka3 with RybkaII book.

Tomcass, Blitz:60' 0

1 Naum 4(x4) +35/-16/=49 59.50% 59.5/100
2 Rybka 3 32-bit +16/-35/=49 40.50% 40.5/100

After the books moves:

When Naum played white, his evaluation was + 0.22 on average.
When Rybka played black, his evaluation was + 0.02 on average.

When Rybka played white, his evaluation was + 0.21 on average.
When Naum played black, his evaluation was + 0.01 on average.

GAMES 101 TO 150

Naum4 with Storm book, Rybka3 with Perfect15 book.

Tomcass, Blitz:60' 0

1 Naum 4(x4) +4/-4/=42 50% 25/50
2 Rybka 3 32-bit +4/-4/=42 50% 25/50

After the books moves:

When Naum played white, his evaluation was + 0.48 on average.
When Rybka played black, his evaluation was - 0.08 on average.

When Rybka played white, his evaluation was + 0.25 on average.
When Naum played black, his evaluation was + 0.05 on average.

GAMES 151 TO 200

Naum4 with Magnificient book, Rybka3 with Perfect15 book.

Tomcass, Blitz:60' 0

1 Naum 4(x4) +15/-5/=30 60% 30/50
2 Rybka 3 32-bit +5/-15/=30 40% 20/50

After the books moves:

When Naum played white, his evaluation was + 0.37 on average.
When Rybka played black, his evaluation was + 0.41 on average.

When Rybka played white, his evaluation was + 0.33 on average.
When Naum played black, his evaluation was + 0.10 on average.


FINAL CUMULATIVE RESULTS AFTER 200 GAMES:

Tomcass, Blitz:60' 0

1 Naum 4(x4) +54/-25/=121 57.25% 114.5/200
2 Rybka 3 32-bit +25/-54/=121 42.75% 85.5/200


Even considering the important handicap for Rybka mentioned by Jeroen, the victory of Naum3 can be qualified, in my opinion, as impressive.

Best regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

[Jeroen]

Hi Tom,

Now play a match with Naum 4 using RybkaII.ctg and Rybka 3 using Storm.ctg. Watch what will happen .

Jeroen

[Tomcass]

Jajajajajajaja, Jeroen, spirit of revenge?.

My forecast:

Rybka3 + Storm = 62,50%
Naum4 + RybkaII = 37,50%

With no more than 30% draws.

(I assume in a quad and 60 minutes game, with a minimum of 50 games).

Regards form Barcelona.

Tom.

... by the way, I have just ordered your RybkaIII book. Let's see how it behaves against Storm and Magnificient.

[pichy]

Jajajajajajaja, Jeroen, spirit of revenge?.

My forecast:

Rybka3 + Storm = 62,50%
Naum4 + RybkaII = 37,50%

With no more than 30% draws.

(I assume in a quad and 60 minutes game, with a minimum of 50 games).

Regards form Barcelona.

Tom.

... by the way, I have just ordered your RybkaIII book. Let's see how it behaves against Storm and Magnificient.

Where can I order Jeroen's RybkaIII.book

[pichy]

Jajajajajajaja, Jeroen, spirit of revenge?.

My forecast:

Rybka3 + Storm = 62,50%
Naum4 + RybkaII = 37,50%

With no more than 30% draws.

(I assume in a quad and 60 minutes game, with a minimum of 50 games).

Regards form Barcelona.

Tom.

... by the way, I have just ordered your RybkaIII book. Let's see how it behaves against Storm and Magnificient.

Where can I order Jeroen's RybkaIII.book

I just found it, in Rybka website. Now we will see Rybka 3 reach a level that Naum 4 won't touch for a while