TalkChess.com

Hi all ,
our rating lists are now online and can be found under the attached links.

40 / 20:
Today we added 1702 games made with 54 different engines to our list. See more in our list "Games of the week". In total our 40/20 list is based now on 378.694 games.

New engines:

The only new engine in our list is Scorpio 2.4 x64 1CPU. The 64bit version is now remarkable faster than 32bit - but we cannot attest a huge progress (2669 in 520 games). The engine is stronger than version 2.2 (2640) - but we still have 2.1 w32 with 2691 in our list.

Updated engines:

Blitz Update
Next update will be in a week. You can of course follow our matches in our forum.

40/120
An overview of running matches you will find in our forum too.

A big „Thank you“ to all testers as usual!

links:
40/20: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rating.htm
Blitz: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/blitz.htm
40/120: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rating120.htm
Tester: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/testers/testers.htm
Games of the week: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_40%2 ... on/gow.JPG
Elo-comparison: http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/Replay/ ... arison.htm

Werner
CEGT-Team

Hi Werner
Just to let you know that Scorpio V2.3 and 2.4 are completely different from previous versions.
I decided to rewrite the evaluation using the faster approach using bitboards.
I could work on both , much like the case wtih Bright and Spark , but i wanted to stick to the newer approach eventhough
it is weaker currently.Though it may come as a shock to many that these versions are the weakest in the series, it doesn't surprise
me at all. The evaluation is not up there with previous version yet.
Thanks for testing
Daniel

Werner

Are you against testing the clones , I think soner or later the chess world is going to have to recognize these engines. It would be really appreciated if you start testing more engines.

Thanks Joseph

No Joseph,

I will not support clones!

Ok I respect that, but then you should go back to only testing Shredder and Fruit ext. and put Rybka on the clone list because Vas willing admitted that he got many ideas from Fruit and shredder. By definition these other engines are not clones. A clone is a perfect identical however these other engines may have been birthed from Rybka however they have evolved into something greater then Rybka which cannot be ignored.

Regards

Joseph

Werner wrote:No Joseph,

I will not support clones!

Good for you Werner and good for CEGT!

Those who wish to test and rate clones can do so themselves instead of wasting their energy trying to get others to lower their moral standards.

Please don't support '' clowns''. I would not do that if I were you either. Especially not those who are not testing them....

I respect your moral standards. But then why do you test Toga and many others ? Their clones in a certain or clear way also.
And it stil has not been proven that "they" are clones.

regards Bram

beram wrote:I respect your moral standards. But then why do you test Toga and many others ? Their clones in a certain or clear way also.
And it stil has not been proven that "they" are clones.

regards Bram

If by "proven" you mean it was shown and the authors admitted it (such as Toga and Strelka), then I think you are misinformed.

Excuse me, the authors of these engines claim there not a clone, are you going by fact and what has been proven or people’s opinion
Well here are some stolen items that I am willing to bet you use.

The Phone was invented by an Italian emergent named Antonio Meucci , stolen by bell because Meucci was not up to speed on patents. See http://www.telephonetribute.com/telepho ... ntors.html

The mouse used for computer navigation was a stolen. See Bill Gates autobiography

the windshield wiper was a stolen idea by ford car company. See fords archive of lawsuits

The list is endless.
You cannot stop forward progress that fact is these authors have made something better then Rybka. The same way vas made something better then fruit which helped Rybka finds its way to the top.