Yes, good point !
In 1994-1995, Rebel 6 was on the top of the SSDF list, just after Chess Genius, the number 1.
1994/7 : https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/r ... UJwgSmzRoJ
1995/6 : https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic ... GRnYtzTth4
Thanks !
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
Yes, good point !
The time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :mwyoung wrote: ↑Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:21 pmIt may lose 100 - 0 even with a x3 time advantage. The match is not about the math. Anyone can look at rating numbers. I had a request of how do engines of today play better, from the ones in the past. One fun way to show this is to let them play.sainzlei wrote:Rebel 6 will be lost 100 times in a row .
This look like not a good idea math between both engine .
So we are going to step threw time in a series of matches with the older engine always having a x3 time advantage, and both engines playing one core for consistency.
Rebel 6 (1994)
Fritz 6 (2000)
Fruit 2 (2005-7)
Rybka 3 (2008)
Houdini 1.5a (2010-11)
Note that the result is far outside the expected performance.Vinvin wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:39 pmThe time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :mwyoung wrote: ↑Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:21 pmIt may lose 100 - 0 even with a x3 time advantage. The match is not about the math. Anyone can look at rating numbers. I had a request of how do engines of today play better, from the ones in the past. One fun way to show this is to let them play.sainzlei wrote:Rebel 6 will be lost 100 times in a row .
This look like not a good idea math between both engine .
:shock:
So we are going to step threw time in a series of matches with the older engine always having a x3 time advantage, and both engines playing one core for consistency.
Rebel 6 (1994)
Fritz 6 (2000)
Fruit 2 (2005-7)
Rybka 3 (2008)
Houdini 1.5a (2010-11)
A recent test on CCRL 40/40 : Houdini 1.5a 64-bit - Stockfish 10 64-bit : 1.5 − 50.5 (+0−49=3)
Link to the page : http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi/ ... _5a_64-bit
I followed some games during the live broadcast and everything seems OK to me.Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:04 pmNote that the result is far outside the expected performance.Vinvin wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 1:39 pmThe time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :mwyoung wrote: ↑Sat Mar 29, 2014 5:21 pmIt may lose 100 - 0 even with a x3 time advantage. The match is not about the math. Anyone can look at rating numbers. I had a request of how do engines of today play better, from the ones in the past. One fun way to show this is to let them play.sainzlei wrote:Rebel 6 will be lost 100 times in a row .
This look like not a good idea math between both engine .
So we are going to step threw time in a series of matches with the older engine always having a x3 time advantage, and both engines playing one core for consistency.
Rebel 6 (1994)
Fritz 6 (2000)
Fruit 2 (2005-7)
Rybka 3 (2008)
Houdini 1.5a (2010-11)
A recent test on CCRL 40/40 : Houdini 1.5a 64-bit - Stockfish 10 64-bit : 1.5 − 50.5 (+0−49=3)
Link to the page : http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi/ ... _5a_64-bit
Actually it should trigger some cross-check of the games and game environment.
Are we talking about the same games, the CCRL games Houdini 1.5a-64 vs. SF 10-64?Vinvin wrote:
The time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :
A recent test on CCRL 40/40 : Houdini 1.5a 64-bit - Stockfish 10 64-bit : 1.5 − 50.5 (+0−49=3)
Link to the page : http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi/ ... _5a_64-bit
Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:04 pm Note that the result is far outside the expected performance.
Actually it should trigger some cross-check of the games and game environment.
Vinvin wrote: I followed some games during the live broadcast and everything seems OK to me.
May be @mwyoung can replay this experience ? :-)
The time control is 40 moves in 40 minutes, so it's not crazy to use 6 minutes for a move in the opening.Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:39 pmAre we talking about the same games, the CCRL games Houdini 1.5a-64 vs. SF 10-64?Vinvin wrote:
The time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :
A recent test on CCRL 40/40 : Houdini 1.5a 64-bit - Stockfish 10 64-bit : 1.5 − 50.5 (+0−49=3)
Link to the page : http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi/ ... _5a_64-bit
Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:04 pm Note that the result is far outside the expected performance.
Actually it should trigger some cross-check of the games and game environment.
Vinvin wrote: I followed some games during the live broadcast and everything seems OK to me.
May be @mwyoung can replay this experience ?
From my experience any perf for more than 40/50 games outside ~170 err level might have a problem
and here it says the diff is 266.
Below is game one. 359 seconds for depth 22 looks already somehow strange in move 14.
...
Code: Select all
Score of Houdini_15_x64 vs stockfish_19072603_x64_modern: 0 - 119 - 9 [0.035]
ELO difference: -575.38 +/- 132.50
128 of 128 games finished.
But not with only reaching depth 22. Note that the real TC is 32/40 BTW. (I can deduct this with my stats tools)Vinvin wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 8:06 pmThe time control is 40 moves in 40 minutes, so it's not crazy to use 6 minutes for a move in the opening.Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 3:39 pmAre we talking about the same games, the CCRL games Houdini 1.5a-64 vs. SF 10-64?Vinvin wrote:
The time when Houdini 1.5a is beaten more than 95% is probably already reached also :
A recent test on CCRL 40/40 : Houdini 1.5a 64-bit - Stockfish 10 64-bit : 1.5 − 50.5 (+0−49=3)
Link to the page : http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040/cgi/ ... _5a_64-bit
Guenther wrote: ↑Wed Aug 14, 2019 2:04 pm Note that the result is far outside the expected performance.
Actually it should trigger some cross-check of the games and game environment.
Vinvin wrote: I followed some games during the live broadcast and everything seems OK to me.
May be @mwyoung can replay this experience ? :-)
From my experience any perf for more than 40/50 games outside ~170 err level might have a problem
and here it says the diff is 266.
Below is game one. 359 seconds for depth 22 looks already somehow strange in move 14.
...
Code: Select all
game 1
+0.00/19 87;w;0-1
+0.04/19 74;w;0-1
+0.06/20 89;w;0-1
+0.15/22 359;w;0-1
+0.23/21 94;w;0-1
+0.24/20 0;w;0-1
+0.25/22 38;w;0-1
+0.25/21 0;w;0-1
+0.27/20 5;w;0-1
+0.21/24 88;w;0-1
+0.41/21 40;w;0-1
+0.42/19 0;w;0-1
+0.24/20 43;w;0-1
+0.23/23 47;w;0-1
+0.36/23 85;w;0-1
+0.19/22 54;w;0-1
+0.12/23 141;w;0-1
+0.13/22 0;w;0-1
-0.03/24 126;w;0-1
-0.03/24 41;w;0-1
-0.03/24 56;w;0-1
-0.03/22 37;w;0-1
-0.03/23 54;w;0-1
+0.03/20 52;w;0-1
-0.02/21 37;w;0-1
-0.07/23 49;w;0-1
-0.07/25 54;w;0-1
-0.07/22 52;w;0-1
-0.02/22 78;w;0-1
-0.07/23 26;w;0-1
-0.07/24 61;w;0-1
-0.07/23 6;w;0-1
-0.07/25 40;w;0-1
-0.07/23 0;w;0-1
-0.07/25 51;w;0-1
-0.07/24 41;w;0-1
-0.07/25 43;w;0-1
-0.07/23 0;w;0-1
-0.07/25 57;w;0-1
-0.07/25 74;w;0-1
-0.18/23 93;w;0-1
-0.18/22 0;w;0-1
-0.19/21 0;w;0-1
-0.07/23 58;w;0-1
-0.07/24 86;w;0-1
-0.07/23 57;w;0-1
-0.13/24 46;w;0-1
-0.14/26 75;w;0-1
-0.21/25 81;w;0-1
-0.30/25 195;w;0-1
-0.25/24 41;w;0-1
-0.28/24 45;w;0-1
-0.29/24 31;w;0-1
-0.28/24 61;w;0-1
-0.28/25 31;w;0-1
-0.35/25 150;w;0-1
-1.07/25 54;w;0-1
-1.07/24 1;w;0-1
-1.07/26 33;w;0-1
-1.16/27 70;w;0-1
-1.15/25 90;w;0-1
-1.07/25 30;w;0-1
-1.15/26 28;w;0-1
-0.07/25 0;w;0-1
-0.07/34 27;w;0-1
-0.97/24 22;w;0-1
-0.97/27 37;w;0-1
-0.97/25 33;w;0-1
-0.97/25 38;w;0-1
-0.65/20 3;w;0-1
-1.73/24 289;w;0-1
-1.76/24 31;w;0-1
-1.77/24 64;w;0-1
-1.83/23 33;w;0-1
-1.85/24 33;w;0-1
-1.89/25 52;w;0-1
-1.95/23 36;w;0-1
-3.09/25 252;w;0-1
-3.18/24 95;w;0-1
-3.33/25 201;w;0-1
-3.33/21 168;w;0-1
-3.41/21 29;w;0-1
-3.49/21 23;w;0-1
-3.73/21 19;w;0-1
-4.71/22 138;w;0-1
-4.88/20 18;w;0-1
-5.96/20 110;w;0-1
-6.40/17 14;w;0-1
-9.60/17 80;w;0-1
game 2
+0.02/20 141;b;1-0
-0.02/20 97;b;1-0
-0.06/19 97;b;1-0
-0.02/20 80;b;1-0
-0.07/20 58;b;1-0
-0.04/20 55;b;1-0
-0.16/18 48;b;1-0
-0.18/20 63;b;1-0
-0.17/18 0;b;1-0
-0.22/18 48;b;1-0
-0.22/19 62;b;1-0
-0.33/19 105;b;1-0
-0.27/20 240;b;1-0
-0.25/18 49;b;1-0
-0.44/19 46;b;1-0
-0.36/18 50;b;1-0
-0.44/19 156;b;1-0
-0.44/17 0;b;1-0
-0.69/19 140;b;1-0
-1.31/18 103;b;1-0
-1.41/17 55;b;1-0
-1.37/15 38;b;1-0
-1.39/16 21;b;1-0
-3.26/17 41;b;1-0
-3.58/17 18;b;1-0
-3.80/17 31;b;1-0
-4.30/16 12;b;1-0
-5.73/16 20;b;1-0
-6.97/16 23;b;1-0
-9.93/15 8;b;1-0
-11.48/17 99;b;1-0