will Shredder be able to strike back in amsterdam ?

[IWB]

or is there no chance ?

Strike back?

During the last Worl championship Rybka lost to Shredder - so it has to be Rybka to strike back

[Event "14th WCCC"]
[Site "Turin"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Shredder"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[ECO ""]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 {Buch 0s} e5 {12s (c5)} 2.Bc4 {Buch 0s} Nf6 {12s} 3.d4 {Buch 0s}
exd4 {10s} 4.Nf3 {Buch 0s} Nc6 {13s (Sxe4)} 5.e5 {Buch 0s} d5 {14s}
6.Bb5 {Buch 0s} Ne4 {12s} 7.Nxd4 {Buch 0s} Bd7 {16s} 8.Bxc6 {Buch 0s}
bxc6 {12s} 9.O-O {Buch 0s} Bc5 {15s (Le7)} 10.f3 {Buch 0s} Ng5 {16s}
11.f4 {Buch 0s} Ne4 {11s} 12.Be3 {Buch 0s} Bb6 {16s} 13.Nd2 {+0.08/19 3:46m}
c5 {10:49m (Sxd2)} 14.N4f3 {0.00/21 3:03m} Nxd2 {8:53m} 15.Qxd2 {0.00/23 0s}
c6 {3:49m (d4)} 16.c3 {0.00/20 3:24m} Rb8 {2:21m (O-O)} 17.Qc2 {+0.13/19 3:14m}
O-O {5:58m (c4)} 18.f5 {+0.57/19 4:35m} Rb7 {1:22m (d4)} 19.f6 {+0.58/20 3:35m}
gxf6 {2:13m} 20.Bh6 {+2.35/20 2:56m} c4+ {15:56m (f5)} 21.Kh1 {+2.14/18 3:00m}
Bc5 {22s} 22.Bxf8 {+2.15/18 6:30m} Bxf8 {15s} 23.Rae1 {+2.35/18 57s}
Bc8 {2:50m (Lg7)} 24.Qf2 {+3.04/20 3:24m} f5 {1:57m} 25.Nd4 {+3.00/20 48s}
Qe8 {1:11m} 26.Qh4 {+3.06/19 1:36m} h6 {1:55m (Txb2)} 27.Qh5 {+3.07/19 3:31m}
Qe7 {3:55m (Lg7)} 28.Nxc6 {+3.48/21 3:41m} Qg5 {13s} 29.Qe2 {+3.65/21 4:53m}
Bc5 {11s} 30.Nd4 {+3.65/20 4:43m} Rb6 {11s} 31.Nf3 {+3.61/20 4:01m}
Qg4 {3:09m (Dh5)} 32.Qd2 {+3.60/18 41s} Be6 {58s} 33.Rb1 {+3.64/20 4:30m}
Bd7 {4:25m} 34.Nd4 {+3.72/20 30s} Be7 {39s} 35.Rbe1 {+3.71/19 2:13m}
Bg5 {1:45m (a5)} 36.Qf2 {+3.78/20 5:55m} f4 {11s (Dh4)} 37.b4 {+3.92/20 2:57m}
Qh5 {19s (Ta6)} 38.Rd1 {+4.17/20 5:44m} Bc8 {1:41m (Tb7)} 39.a4 {+4.26/20 2:56m}
Rb7 {3:04m} 40.b5 {+4.29/20 0s} Bg4 {1:53m (Kh7)} 41.Nf3 {+4.17/19 2:05m}
Be6 {10s} 42.Ra1 {+4.55/19 1:23m} Bd8 {3:35m} 43.a5 {+4.80/21 0s}
Qg4 {1:26m (Kh7)} 44.Qc5 {+5.64/19 1:37m} Kh7 {3:31m} 45.Qc6 {+6.01/21 0s}
Bc8 {1:57m (Tc7)} 46.Qxd5 {+6.57/18 32s} Rd7 {4:23m (Dd7)} 47.Qxc4 {+7.49/19 2:29m}
Bb7 {10s} 48.Rad1 {+7.24/20 3:36m} Bxa5 {8s} 49.Rxd7 {+7.24/20 2:46m}
Qxd7 {8s} 50.Qxf4 {+7.48/21 2:26m} Bxf3 {1:29m (Lb6)} 51.Rxf3 {+9.26/19 1:52m}
Kg8 {12s (Kg7)} 52.h4 {+11.15/20 1:38m} Qe6 {1:48m} 53.Qg3+ {+11.24/20 0s}
1-0

I know, I know the comment was a bit sarcastic - but we will know soon!

Btw: Shredder had the same problem in Paderborn end of last year. No one realized the nearly perfect score of Shredder in that tourney, no one saw the impressive games of it there because Shredder had a bookloss vs Rybka - and a loss was what most expected.

I am looking forward to the WC in Amsterdam
Ingo

[mclane]

shredder should play without book.

[Eelco de Groot]

Difficult... but good luck!

I wonder what can be expected from GridChess which seems to be a kind of multi cpu Toga running on distributed clients. Whatever that means. The description does not mention the number of processors or cores utilized.

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/p ... php?id=520

But it sounds impressive and probably must be considered a co-favourite.

If there is a protest from any of the participants against the inclusion of Robert Hyatt as an author of Gridchess and the tournament director or arbiter asks Robert Hyatt whether is a a member of the team of authors, I think that he will deny that he has given his permission to be listed as such. In that case I don't see how the tournament committee can fail to uphold such a protest and Gridchess should not be allowed to play using Crafty parts.

I don't know if there is going to be such a protest, but I don't think the Gridchess team can be assured of participation.

Personally I don't think they should participate in a tournament for the world title, not under these conditions. Paderborn, okay, maybe, if the rules allow it and authors have given their permission to be represented by the program, but the world title should have some strict rules. The rules should be clear about not allowing what are effectively open source program-parts being used by another program without the authors of this open source code having given specific permission to be represented by this program, and this program alone, and without the authors of the open source code having been active co-authors of this hybrid program.

But to be honest I don't know what the present rules say about this and I believe that Theo van der Storm, not in any official role, has said in an earlier thread that maybe a specific rule should be made about this, to make the case clear, if not for this year then for later editions of the WCCC.

Eelco

[Marc Lacrosse]

shredder should play without book.

Sandro Necchi's books are of the highest quality.

One book loss is always possible : other bookers do also work!

Overall Shredder without book is at least 70 Elo points weaker than the same playing with its public book.

And I think that the difference should be _much_ higher when facing opponents equiped with properly tuned competition books full of anti-computers traps.

Do have a look at the sophistication of top engines openings in daily practice on Playchess : the level of preparation in openings like the Najdorf is really terrific.

Shredder-without-book's chances of performing well in a top level competition like the WCCC are close to nil imho.

Marc

[Uri Blass]

or is there no chance ?

Strike back?

During the last Worl championship Rybka lost to Shredder - so it has to be Rybka to strike back

[Event "14th WCCC"]
[Site "Turin"]
[Date "2006.05.26"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Shredder"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[ECO ""]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 {Buch 0s} e5 {12s (c5)} 2.Bc4 {Buch 0s} Nf6 {12s} 3.d4 {Buch 0s}
exd4 {10s} 4.Nf3 {Buch 0s} Nc6 {13s (Sxe4)} 5.e5 {Buch 0s} d5 {14s}
6.Bb5 {Buch 0s} Ne4 {12s} 7.Nxd4 {Buch 0s} Bd7 {16s} 8.Bxc6 {Buch 0s}
bxc6 {12s} 9.O-O {Buch 0s} Bc5 {15s (Le7)} 10.f3 {Buch 0s} Ng5 {16s}
11.f4 {Buch 0s} Ne4 {11s} 12.Be3 {Buch 0s} Bb6 {16s} 13.Nd2 {+0.08/19 3:46m}
c5 {10:49m (Sxd2)} 14.N4f3 {0.00/21 3:03m} Nxd2 {8:53m} 15.Qxd2 {0.00/23 0s}
c6 {3:49m (d4)} 16.c3 {0.00/20 3:24m} Rb8 {2:21m (O-O)} 17.Qc2 {+0.13/19 3:14m}
O-O {5:58m (c4)} 18.f5 {+0.57/19 4:35m} Rb7 {1:22m (d4)} 19.f6 {+0.58/20 3:35m}
gxf6 {2:13m} 20.Bh6 {+2.35/20 2:56m} c4+ {15:56m (f5)} 21.Kh1 {+2.14/18 3:00m}
Bc5 {22s} 22.Bxf8 {+2.15/18 6:30m} Bxf8 {15s} 23.Rae1 {+2.35/18 57s}
Bc8 {2:50m (Lg7)} 24.Qf2 {+3.04/20 3:24m} f5 {1:57m} 25.Nd4 {+3.00/20 48s}
Qe8 {1:11m} 26.Qh4 {+3.06/19 1:36m} h6 {1:55m (Txb2)} 27.Qh5 {+3.07/19 3:31m}
Qe7 {3:55m (Lg7)} 28.Nxc6 {+3.48/21 3:41m} Qg5 {13s} 29.Qe2 {+3.65/21 4:53m}
Bc5 {11s} 30.Nd4 {+3.65/20 4:43m} Rb6 {11s} 31.Nf3 {+3.61/20 4:01m}
Qg4 {3:09m (Dh5)} 32.Qd2 {+3.60/18 41s} Be6 {58s} 33.Rb1 {+3.64/20 4:30m}
Bd7 {4:25m} 34.Nd4 {+3.72/20 30s} Be7 {39s} 35.Rbe1 {+3.71/19 2:13m}
Bg5 {1:45m (a5)} 36.Qf2 {+3.78/20 5:55m} f4 {11s (Dh4)} 37.b4 {+3.92/20 2:57m}
Qh5 {19s (Ta6)} 38.Rd1 {+4.17/20 5:44m} Bc8 {1:41m (Tb7)} 39.a4 {+4.26/20 2:56m}
Rb7 {3:04m} 40.b5 {+4.29/20 0s} Bg4 {1:53m (Kh7)} 41.Nf3 {+4.17/19 2:05m}
Be6 {10s} 42.Ra1 {+4.55/19 1:23m} Bd8 {3:35m} 43.a5 {+4.80/21 0s}
Qg4 {1:26m (Kh7)} 44.Qc5 {+5.64/19 1:37m} Kh7 {3:31m} 45.Qc6 {+6.01/21 0s}
Bc8 {1:57m (Tc7)} 46.Qxd5 {+6.57/18 32s} Rd7 {4:23m (Dd7)} 47.Qxc4 {+7.49/19 2:29m}
Bb7 {10s} 48.Rad1 {+7.24/20 3:36m} Bxa5 {8s} 49.Rxd7 {+7.24/20 2:46m}
Qxd7 {8s} 50.Qxf4 {+7.48/21 2:26m} Bxf3 {1:29m (Lb6)} 51.Rxf3 {+9.26/19 1:52m}
Kg8 {12s (Kg7)} 52.h4 {+11.15/20 1:38m} Qe6 {1:48m} 53.Qg3+ {+11.24/20 0s}
1-0

I know, I know the comment was a bit sarcastic - but we will know soon!

Btw: Shredder had the same problem in Paderborn end of last year. No one realized the nearly perfect score of Shredder in that tourney, no one saw the impressive games of it there because Shredder had a bookloss vs Rybka - and a loss was what most expected.

I am looking forward to the WC in Amsterdam
Ingo

I do not like this excuse.
The Rybka team can also say that they had a book loss in the 14th WCCC
against Shredder.

Their book chose a line that rybka does not know how to play.

Uri

[IWB]

Hello Uri

There is no excuse of my side. Read my posting again pls. After I posted the lost game of Rybka I wrote: "Shredder had the same problem ... because Shredder had a bookloss ...". In other words: Rybka had a book loss and Shredder had one.

To make it clear: I did not excuse anything!

Bye
Ingo

or is there no chance ?

Btw: Shredder had the same problem in Paderborn end of last year. No one realized the nearly perfect score of Shredder in that tourney, no one saw the impressive games of it there because Shredder had a bookloss vs Rybka - and a loss was what most expected.

I am looking forward to the WC in Amsterdam
Ingo

I do not like this excuse.
The Rybka team can also say that they had a book loss in the 14th WCCC
against Shredder.

Their book chose a line that rybka does not know how to play.

Uri

[sandro Necchi]

Wihtout book?

So, all the work I have made is for nothing?:-)

Jokes a part I like Shredder with my book more than without:-)

[sandro Necchi]

Thank you Mark!

I believe and hope my new book is better...we will see.

Ciao
Sandro

[mclane]

)

i would like to buy a new shredder. but i think i cannot buy a program that is weaker than zap-chess MP i bought for 49 EURO from niggemann.

[George Tsavdaris]

Why no Hiarcs there?

The short notice of the event was the main factor. Mark and I are unable to attend. If we use an operator then the entry fee is doubled to 1000 Euros.
The total cost to play would be about 3000 Euros.

1000 €? 3000 € to play ????
WOW! This is insane....