CCRL rating lists updated (4th June 2010)

[Shaun]

The latest CCRL Rating Lists and Statistics are available for viewing from the following links:
http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/ (40/40)
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404.live/ (40/4)
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404FRC/ (FRC 40/4)

Please note that the three lists are updated separately to each other.
The links given in each update report will give you the currently up to date lists.

The links to the various rating lists can be found just beneath the default Best Versions list (as in this screenshot). Specific 32-bit rating lists are denoted as such to the right of the default list in each category. The default lists contain the 64-bit engines.



Our 40 moves in 40 minutes repeating and 40 moves in 4 minutes repeating are both adjusted to the AMD64 X2 4600+ (2.4GHz).

Currently active testers are Graham Banks, Ray Banks, Shaun Brewer, Aser Huerga, Kirill Kryukov, Dom Leste, Denis Mendoza, Cody Rowland, Wassim Saeed, Joshua Shriver, Charles Smith, Gabor Szots and Martin Thoresen.
A big welcome to our new tester Adam Hair.

Be aware that in the early stages of testing, an engine's rating can often fluctuate a lot.
It is strongly advised to look at the many other rating lists available in order to get a more accurate overall picture of an engine's rating relative to others.

The LOS (likelihood of superiority) stats to the right hand side of each rating list tell you the likelihood in percentage terms of each engine being superior to the engine directly below them.

All games are available for download by engine, by month or by ECO code.
ELO ratings are now saved in all game databases for those engines that have 200 games or more.

Clicking on an engine name will give details as to opponents played plus homepage links where applicable.

Custom lists of engines can be selected for comparison.

An openings report page lists the number of games played by ECO codes with draw percentage and White win percentage. Clicking on a column heading will sort the list by that column.

For any testers interested in joining our group, please read our homepage before applying.

[ArmyBridge]

Hi Shaun
What is Rybka 4 TC3100150?? it´s 20 elo stronger than "normal" version

Regards

[Vinvin]

Hi Shaun
What is Rybka 4 TC3100150?? it´s 20 elo stronger than "normal" version

Regards

I saw that too ... good question !!

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi Shaun
What is Rybka 4 TC3100150?? it´s 20 elo stronger than "normal" version

Regards

I saw that too ... good question !!

IIRC,it's a personality by Albert Silver....
Dr.D

[Albert Silver]

Hi Shaun
What is Rybka 4 TC3100150?? it´s 20 elo stronger than "normal" version

Regards

I saw that too ... good question !!

IIRC,it's a personality by Albert Silver....
Dr.D

Not exactly, as personality implies I changed the evaluation somehow.

I was never satisfied with Rybka 4's time control settings, and even after it went final, I continued and continue to test, to find the settings that yield the best results for different types of time controls (sudden death, repeating, and increment). These settings are the best I found for repeating time controls such as those used by CCRL/CEGT/SSDF tested over large samples of games.

To use them, set Normal Move=100 and Max Move =150. Note these are not best for all types of TCs, just repeating, such as 40/4 + 40/4 +, etc.

[Kohflote]

Hi Albert,

For time control of 6 mins per move, is your setting better than R4 default setting?

Thank you,
Kah Huat, Koh

[Albert Silver]

Hi Albert,

For time control of 6 mins per move, is your setting better than R4 default setting?

Thank you,
Kah Huat, Koh

I have done no testing for set times per move, though if there is no accumulation, I would imagine the best time management is simply to think 5m59 seconds per move, every move.

[ArmyBridge]

Hey!!! Rybka 4 TC3100150 was removed from the list, why???? someone from CCRL team could explain it???

ReGRRRRds

[Albert Silver]

Hey!!! Rybka 4 TC3100150 was removed from the list, why???? someone from CCRL team could explain it???

ReGRRRRds

I see it just fine.