Rybka 4 vs Stockfish 1.8 - Long TC Match - LIVE BROADCAST!

[Tord Romstad]

Did Stockfish really play the Blumenfeld gambit (one of my favorite openings!) on its own in game 6? That's super cool!

[IGarcia]

Did Stockfish really play the Blumenfeld gambit (one of my favorite openings!) on its own in game 6? That's super cool!

The first moves are fixed (look at top in match page):

Opening Database: AH-48_Basic_Positions.pgn (24 Positions Used)

In that game the first engine move was SF as black: 4. .. b5[/b]

SF kickas

[S.Taylor]

21.f2f3, game 7.
Honestly, I was watching when this move was played, and i just couldn't work it out why SF played this, being also that it badens his white squared bishop even more.
It is simply amazing, to see now how necesary this was, during the moves of the late 20's (we are now at move 29, before i wrote this).
It all fits in with what's happening now.
It's no surprise that _I_ couldn't forsee all this, but this might even be a level higher than all human Gm's. I don't mean always, but i don't know if every human GM or even WC would always have seen that it was the right plan to play 21.f2f3.
I'm not promising it was, but it seems to fit very well with what followed.

[However, I still didn't understand all other moves yet. I must admit it DOES seem strange by move 34, that ALL whites pawns are now on the same square as his one bishop]

[Martin Thoresen]

Martin,
Are you allowed to change details after you say you will do something? If so, can i say what _I_ would vote for?
That is, that IF by game 12, Rybka has earned a +5 score, then the outcome is certain enough, and you need not show us how well Rybka crushes SF... unless that was what interests us.
IF SF has won one game, and you want to see it happen again, in order to observe things a bit more, then I would give it to the very most, till game 24.
Next match?
If new Houdini is out by July 15, and seems to be a clear improvement over Houdini 1.02, then that can go vs. Rybka. If not, do other things (Hiarcs/SF?) and leave Rybka for later.

The point of these matches are not outcome X or Y. They will run all the way from game 1 through 48. Of course it might not always be equally matched participants, but that is not the point either.

I will await Houdini 1.03 and see how it fares, if it's a major improvement it might go vs Rybka else it will go vs Stockfish.

Best Regards,
Martin

[pacifist]

Nice games and many wins for now . Maybe SF could have some draw chances the last game he lost but had to say since the endgame with bad colour bishop and a pawn is lost if white loses all his pawns.

Game 9 SF can win the h3 pawn, closed position and maybe it will not be enough to win because of that ...

[IGarcia]

Nice games and many wins for now . Maybe SF could have some draw chances the last game he lost but had to say since the endgame with bad colour bishop and a pawn is lost if white loses all his pawns.

Yes, many wins. And i think you are speaking about game 7, with a draw position and finally Rybka won. I feel SF had a couple of games were had the chance to draw and loosed in the end. Here looks better Houdini playing ends, and finding the way to force a draw, making opposite impossible to win.


So far both engines are playing extreme games. Many moves very hard to understand, some only understand the reason and utility several moves ahead. Great games.

[notyetagm]

Martin,
Are you allowed to change details after you say you will do something? If so, can i say what _I_ would vote for?
That is, that IF by game 12, Rybka has earned a +5 score, then the outcome is certain enough, and you need not show us how well Rybka crushes SF... unless that was what interests us.
IF SF has won one game, and you want to see it happen again, in order to observe things a bit more, then I would give it to the very most, till game 24.
Next match?
If new Houdini is out by July 15, and seems to be a clear improvement over Houdini 1.02, then that can go vs. Rybka. If not, do other things (Hiarcs/SF?) and leave Rybka for later.

The point of these matches are not outcome X or Y. They will run all the way from game 1 through 48. Of course it might not always be equally matched participants, but that is not the point either.

I will await Houdini 1.03 and see how it fares, if it's a major improvement it might go vs Rybka else it will go vs Stockfish.

Best Regards,
Martin

I cannot wait until Houdini 1.03 comes out.

Christmas in July!

[S.Taylor]

43.e3e4 (G13), that's a shame (according to my feelings). White may think that it's good to exchange a bad bishop for Blacks good one. But I'm not so sure if in this case, white cannot use it to attack more than black can use his to defend.
Now, It looks to me like Black can more easily defend, and certainly not lose this game.
(Ah! OK, so maybe it WAS a good idea, and will keep the advantage, as the exchange by black will also give white a central past pawn which might be useful).

In general, however, I feel happy that Stockfish made such a good recovery and at 12 games was trailing by only one.

It may indeed do better than Houdini did, in the end.

[pacifist]

Yes, I have the same opinion, e4 was a bad move and also I think white should have kept the knights and not exchange them ... so early. Anyway, for now the result is very honorable and it's a fun match. Previous game with Queen vs 2 rooks Stockfish made some remarquable manouvers even if it still was a draw in the end .

[S.Taylor]

Yes, I have the same opinion, e4 was a bad move and also I think white should have kept the knights and not exchange them ... so early. Anyway, for now the result is very honorable and it's a fun match. Previous game with Queen vs 2 rooks Stockfish made some remarquable manouvers even if it still was a draw in the end .

Thank you for admitting to the same opinion. However I myself cannot claim to be sure of all my comments.
These 2 superstar engines, are stronger than any human world champion in history, and possibly they would have known if and when it was good to sacrifice positional pros and cons for building king side attacks etc. Maybe there was nothing in it to strive for.
That is why I wish some top GM's would answer some of our questions here (unless you are also one!), or atleast, one of the posters who see themselves as high ranking masters, or experts, such as Terry McCracken!

[I myself used to lose many games from premature attacks or sacrifices (but a couple of brilliancies, too)].