Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.
Moderator: Ras
Ovyron
Posts: 4562 Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Post
by Ovyron » Tue Nov 11, 2008 5:25 am
Steve Maughan wrote: I agree. UCI is the standard - Winboard is yesterday's technology. It's the computer chess equivalent of releasing a record only on vinyl.
More like VHS's and CDs, each have their advantages
Zach Wegner
Posts: 1922 Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 12:51 am
Location: Earth
Post
by Zach Wegner » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:04 am
Yeah, funnily enough, besides preferring the xboard protocol, I also prefer albums on vinyl.
krazyken
Post
by krazyken » Tue Nov 11, 2008 6:45 am
I liked the queen side breakthrough in this game:
[Event "Computer Chess Game"]
[Site "Mulert.local"]
[Date "2008.11.10"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Alf v1.09"]
[Black "Thinker53B"]
[Result "0-1"]
[TimeControl "40/7200"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. g3 e6 3. c4 d5 4. Bg2 Bb4+ 5. Nc3 {+0.18/13 3:14} O-O 6. Nf3
dxc4 7. O-O Nbd7 8. Qc2 {-0.12/13 3:52} c6 9. Rd1 {-0.08/11 3:47} Qb6 10.
Bg5 {+0.05/13 3:52} Qa6 11. a3 {+0.00/13 3:52} Ba5 12. Bf4 {-0.05/12 3:45}
b5 13. Bd6 {-0.06/13 3:42} Rd8 14. e4 {-0.17/13 3:42} h6 15.
e5 {-0.20/14 3:39} Nd5 16. Ne4 {-0.19/13 3:24} Qb7 17. Nc5 {-0.03/12 4:10}
Nxc5 18. dxc5 {-0.02/14 3:09} Bd7 19. g4 {+0.02/13 3:17} g6 20.
g5 {+0.14/13 3:17} h5 21. a4 {+0.13/12 3:17} a6 22. Nh4 {+0.02/12 3:17} Be8
23. Qe4 {+0.03/13 3:17} c3 24. b3 {-0.20/13 3:17} bxa4 25.
bxa4 {-0.20/13 3:17} Qc8 26. Rd4 {+0.09/12 4:06} Rd7 27.
Nf3 {-0.09/13 3:14} Rb7 28. Ne1 {-0.05/13 3:14} Rb2 29. Nc2 {-0.20/13 3:14}
Qb7 30. Bf3 {-0.20/12 3:14} Bd8 31. h4 {-0.16/13 3:14} Qb3 32.
Bd1 {-0.09/14 3:14} Ra2 33. Ne1 {-0.18/14 2:54} Qb2 34.
Rxa2 {-0.20/16 2:37} Qxa2 35. Bc2 {-0.20/15 2:21} Ra7 36.
Qf3 {-0.20/14 2:07} Kg7 37. Qe2 {-0.27/12 1:54} a5 38. Nd3 {-0.40/13 1:43}
Rb7 39. Nc1 {-0.75/13 1:32} Qa1 40. Rd1 {-1.20/14 1:23} Nf4 41.
Qf3 {-1.02/16 4:18} Qb2 42. Be4 {-1.42/14 4:03} c2 43. Re1 {-1.45/16 3:55}
Nd5 44. Rf1 {-1.64/14 5:44} Rb4 45. Nd3 {-2.95/14 3:18} Qb1 46.
Nc1 {-2.50/14 3:19} Rd4 47. Qe2 {-3.85/14 3:19} Qb4 48. Bg2 {-4.84/13 3:18}
Qxa4 49. Nd3 {-5.12/14 3:17} Nc3 50. Qf3 {-5.78/14 3:11} Qc4 51.
Nc1 {-6.14/16 3:10} a4 52. Bh3 {-5.66/14 3:10} Kh7 53. Re1 {-8.69/14 3:57}
Rd1 54. Rf1 {-13.99/16 3:03} Rxc1 55. Rxc1 {-14.10/15 3:03} Ne2+ 56.
Kh2 {-18.77/14 3:08} Nxc1
{White resigns} 0-1
Samsunait
Post
by Samsunait » Thu Nov 13, 2008 7:10 pm
Which version among Passive Active and Inert is the best/with the nicest playstyle?
F. Bluemers
Posts: 880 Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:21 pm
Location: Nederland
Post
by F. Bluemers » Thu Nov 13, 2008 9:41 pm
My CD Player :
Best
Fonzy
Dr.Wael Deeb
Posts: 9773 Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:44 pm
Location: Amman,Jordan
Post
by Dr.Wael Deeb » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:22 pm
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
F. Bluemers
Posts: 880 Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 11:21 pm
Location: Nederland
Post
by F. Bluemers » Thu Nov 13, 2008 10:30 pm
red rays too
I have not the patience to convert the records to cd.
besides ,cd misses the all important ritual
try to get this on cd doc:
yummy!
Best
Fonzy
Ovyron
Posts: 4562 Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Post
by Ovyron » Thu Nov 13, 2008 11:23 pm
SzG wrote: Each has its target opponent against which it is supposed to obtain best result.
Yes, but, Active is aimed against humans, and Inert is Aimed against engines, what is Passive aimed for?
About style, I feel like Thinker Inert is a different engine each game!
Ovyron
Posts: 4562 Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 4:30 am
Post
by Ovyron » Fri Nov 14, 2008 7:28 am
SzG wrote: The readme says Passive is intended to play against engines, while Inert is an experimental version - against whom?
I read that the readme is old and it's meant to be updated to say that Inert must be used against engines.
Now the question is, Passive is now meant to play against whom?
Graham Banks
Posts: 44645 Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
Location: Auckland, NZ
Post
by Graham Banks » Fri Nov 14, 2008 8:45 am
SzG wrote: Ovyron wrote: SzG wrote: Each has its target opponent against which it is supposed to obtain best result.
Yes, but, Active is aimed against humans, and Inert is Aimed against engines, what is Passive aimed for?
About style, I feel like Thinker Inert is a different engine each game!
The readme says Passive is intended to play against engines, while Inert is an experimental version - against whom?
http://www.open-aurec.com/wbforum/viewtopic.php?t=49609
"Kerwin" posted:
I have joined Lance in the development of the engine.
5.3B is out.
There is a new variety (Inert Thinker) which is another variation of the evaluation code. Compared to Passive Thinker, this one seems to perform better against other engines.
Passive Thinker should improve slightly from the fix in the check move generation. The improvement may not be that noticeable.
Active Thinker should have a noticeable improvement. The piece-square evaluation has been corrected.
Lastly, the SMP versions are significantly better. There was a nasty bug in the code that propagates the results from the helper board to the parent board. This has bee corrected.
Enjoy...
gbanksnz at gmail.com