FGRL rating list - 60 sec + 0.6 sec
Fire 8.1 (+96 to Fire 7.1)
RubiChess 2.1 NNUE (+129 to RubiChess 2.0 NNUE)
Rodent IV 0.30 (-3 to Rodent IV 0.22)
Velvet v1.2.0 (New: 2549)
Supernova 2.3 (New: 2439)
http://www.fastgm.de
FGRL, 60 sec + 0.6 sec - 7. Fire 8.1, 9. RubiChess 2.1, 62. Rodent IV 0.30, 78. Velvet v1.2.0, 85. Supernova 2.3
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
fastgm
- Posts: 818
- Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:57 pm
-
Alayan
- Posts: 550
- Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 8:48 pm
- Full name: Alayan Feh
Re: FGRL, 60 sec + 0.6 sec - 7. Fire 8.1, 9. RubiChess 2.1, 62. Rodent IV 0.30, 78. Velvet v1.2.0, 85. Supernova 2.3
Fire 8.1: stealing Houdini 6's evaluation and doing worse than it. What a great job by Norman. 
-
kranium
- Posts: 2129
- Joined: Thu May 29, 2008 10:43 am
Re: FGRL, 60 sec + 0.6 sec - 7. Fire 8.1, 9. RubiChess 2.1, 62. Rodent IV 0.30, 78. Velvet v1.2.0, 85. Supernova 2.3
Thx...yes Fire is clearly superior at fast TCs.
Sadly, all those Stockfish patches you and Andrew directly applied to Ethereal...everything you took from SF (which remains completely unacknowledged on github and in the readme), and Ethereal is still mediocre at best?
Time to move on from that grade 9 Programming in C class stuff! 
-
mehmet123
- Posts: 670
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2020 10:38 pm
- Location: Turkey
- Full name: Mehmet Karaman
Re: FGRL, 60 sec + 0.6 sec - 7. Fire 8.1, 9. RubiChess 2.1, 62. Rodent IV 0.30, 78. Velvet v1.2.0, 85. Supernova 2.3
Houdini 1.0 is based on RobboLito and there is too much Stockfish code in Houdini 5 and Houdini 6.
Can Norman Schmidt be more honest than Robert Houdart in computer chess programming?