But i like to see it. (My personal taste!)
I like to see the difference in how it plays, even if it is less than 1000 games (or however many).
I DO see it in the results of games 10-30.
But from games 1-9, it looks surprisingly low. (If i watched the actual games, i might have seen it differently. But judging by results alone, not).
How many did it lose? 10.5!
If the first 10 games were all losses, and the eleventh game was a draw, and the remaining games were wins, would i like such an engine which can play so badly in 10 consecutive games, to use for analysis?
OK, but i wasn't claiming it was not the highest rated engine, if tested over 1000 games.
But am i obsessed? yes! That's why i am following chess computer news so many years now.
The Champions 2012 4CPU
Moderator: Ras
-
- Posts: 8514
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:25 am
- Location: Jerusalem Israel
-
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 10:27 pm
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
Crosstable (made with ScidvsPC 4.8)Graham Banks wrote:THE CHAMPIONS 2012 4CPU
Xeon X5430x2 Octal
ChessGUI
1024mb hash
3-4-5 piece tablebases
Ponder off
WorldClass2012-2.cgb book (limited to 8 move depth)
40 moves in 29 minutes repeating (adapted for the CCRL)
All engines 64-bit 4CPU where available
2 cycles 30 rounds
Round 30
Gull II b2 64-bit 4CPU v Hiarcs 14 4CPU (draw)
Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU v Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU (0-1)
Chiron 1.5 64-bit 4CPU v Critter 1.6a 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
DeepSaros 3.1a 64-bit 4CPU v Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU (0-1)
Bouquet 1.5 64-bit 4CPU v Stockfish 2.3.1 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Strelka 5.5 64-bit v Equinox 1.60 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Komodo 5 64-bit v Sting SF 2 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
IvanHoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU v Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Final Standings
20.0 - Critter 1.6a 64-bit 4CPU
20.0 - Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU
19.5 - Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU
18.0 - Sting SF 2 64-bit 4CPU
18.0 - Strelka 5.5 64-bit
17.0 - Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU
16.0 - Bouquet 1.5 64-bit 4CPU
15.0 - Equinox 1.60 64-bit 4CPU
14.5 - IvanHoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU
14.0 - Komodo 5 64-bit
13.5 - Hiarcs 14 4CPU
13.5 - Stockfish 2.3.1 64-bit 4CPU
11.5 - DeepSaros 3.1a 64-bit 4CPU
11.0 - Chiron 1.5 64-bit 4CPU
10.0 - Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU
8.5 - Gull II b2 64-bit 4CPU
Round 30 PGN - http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... p?id=28077
Complete tournament PGN (zipped) - http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... p?id=28076
Thanks for tournament!

Uploaded with ImageShack.us
-
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:02 pm
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
if we cut the table only to first 8 engines (result >= 50% = 15 points), we received:S.Taylor wrote:If you count only the last 21 games, Houdini would have had a resounding victory.
Code: Select all
1. Sting +4
2.Critter +2
3-4. Rybka, Vitruvius +1
5. Houdini 0
6-7. Strelka. Bouquet -2
8. Equinox -4
It is a single 2 cycle tournament and the result of many games can be accidential (other than rating).
Maybe, I can't be friendly, but let me be useful.
-
- Posts: 1600
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 am
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
Tournament has been a strong, very strong.
Graham already has accustomed us, putting their time, electricity, hardware and knowledge.
Thanks.
Curiosities,
Negative, or Gull Did not get a win.
Bouquet, King's tie game, 24 no less.
against only two defeats by Critter how bright victor.
Strelka six wins in the last three. And well over Komodo, rival single core.
And sure there are many more.
Thanks, Graham.
Graham already has accustomed us, putting their time, electricity, hardware and knowledge.
Thanks.
Curiosities,
Negative, or Gull Did not get a win.
Bouquet, King's tie game, 24 no less.
against only two defeats by Critter how bright victor.
Strelka six wins in the last three. And well over Komodo, rival single core.
And sure there are many more.
Thanks, Graham.
-
- Posts: 10948
- Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
- Full name: Kai Laskos
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
In the fist 9 games Houdini got 3.5 points out of 9 games, and was expected to get 5.5. Big deal? Someone like you really needs the playground with engines separated by 500 Elo points, so even a draw is rare there, and an unexpected loss is a freak event.S.Taylor wrote:But i like to see it. (My personal taste!)
I like to see the difference in how it plays, even if it is less than 1000 games (or however many).
I DO see it in the results of games 10-30.
But from games 1-9, it looks surprisingly low. (If i watched the actual games, i might have seen it differently. But judging by results alone, not).
How many did it lose? 10.5!
If the first 10 games were all losses, and the eleventh game was a draw, and the remaining games were wins, would i like such an engine which can play so badly in 10 consecutive games, to use for analysis?
OK, but i wasn't claiming it was not the highest rated engine, if tested over 1000 games.
But am i obsessed? yes! That's why i am following chess computer news so many years now.
Kai
-
- Posts: 1169
- Joined: Sun Feb 14, 2010 10:02 pm
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
Well said!velmarin wrote:Tournament has been a strong, very strong.
Graham already has accustomed us, putting their time, electricity, hardware and knowledge.
Thanks Graham.

Maybe, I can't be friendly, but let me be useful.
-
- Posts: 8514
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 3:25 am
- Location: Jerusalem Israel
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
Yes. That's me. So i am used to waiting for years, and only buy occasionaly. But now I'm intending to buy another 2 or 3, as i have a new computer now, and, i am much happier with the program playing strength in general, now. I can rely on them to see many more things than years ago.Laskos wrote:In the fist 9 games Houdini got 3.5 points out of 9 games, and was expected to get 5.5. Big deal? Someone like you really needs the playground with engines separated by 500 Elo points, so even a draw is rare there, and an unexpected loss is a freak event.S.Taylor wrote:But i like to see it. (My personal taste!)
I like to see the difference in how it plays, even if it is less than 1000 games (or however many).
I DO see it in the results of games 10-30.
But from games 1-9, it looks surprisingly low. (If i watched the actual games, i might have seen it differently. But judging by results alone, not).
How many did it lose? 10.5!
If the first 10 games were all losses, and the eleventh game was a draw, and the remaining games were wins, would i like such an engine which can play so badly in 10 consecutive games, to use for analysis?
OK, but i wasn't claiming it was not the highest rated engine, if tested over 1000 games.
But am i obsessed? yes! That's why i am following chess computer news so many years now.
Kai
-
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:45 am
Re: Round 30 and Final Standings
Those results (that are all well within statistical occurrences) are even more likely to happen given the wideness of the book, as I've explained in a previous post.Laskos wrote: In the fist 9 games Houdini got 3.5 points out of 9 games, and was expected to get 5.5. Big deal? Someone like you really needs the playground with engines separated by 500 Elo points, so even a draw is rare there, and an unexpected loss is a freak event.
Kai
Since the type of opening plays a big role in chess, it just take a somewhat subpar choice to have a bad result indipendently from everything else. The more wide a book is, the more subpar (in all aspects, not necessarily a "bad" line, but just a little passive or not conform to the style of the engine etc.) lines it will obviously have.
So there's nothing uncommon here. 70 elo of difference means a lot of losses and draws that can happen, and a wide book means even more randomness given by the lines.
-
- Posts: 2128
- Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:04 pm
- Location: Madrid, Spain.
Re: Round 30 and final standings.
Hello Graham!
Here is a rating list based in this match only using my own Fortran programme (which does not read PGN files) and the EloSTAT algorithm in BayesElo:
Differences are almost negligible!
Differences are less than 0.5%! It is due to the high draw ratio: lower draw ratios would bring differences of almost 1%, which I still consider very low knowing my simple, minimal algorithm (if it can be named algorithm).
I stay tuned for the next 8 CPU Swiss tournament!
Regards from Spain.
Ajedrecista.
Thanks again for all your matches: they are very amazing.Graham Banks wrote:THE CHAMPIONS 2012 4CPU
Xeon X5430x2 Octal
ChessGUI
1024mb hash
3-4-5 piece tablebases
Ponder off
WorldClass2012-2.cgb book (limited to 8 move depth)
40 moves in 29 minutes repeating (adapted for the CCRL)
All engines 64-bit 4CPU where available
2 cycles 30 rounds
Round 30
Gull II b2 64-bit 4CPU v Hiarcs 14 4CPU (draw)
Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU v Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU (0-1)
Chiron 1.5 64-bit 4CPU v Critter 1.6a 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
DeepSaros 3.1a 64-bit 4CPU v Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU (0-1)
Bouquet 1.5 64-bit 4CPU v Stockfish 2.3.1 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Strelka 5.5 64-bit v Equinox 1.60 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Komodo 5 64-bit v Sting SF 2 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
IvanHoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU v Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU (draw)
Final Standings
20.0 - Critter 1.6a 64-bit 4CPU
20.0 - Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU
19.5 - Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU
18.0 - Sting SF 2 64-bit 4CPU
18.0 - Strelka 5.5 64-bit
17.0 - Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU
16.0 - Bouquet 1.5 64-bit 4CPU
15.0 - Equinox 1.60 64-bit 4CPU
14.5 - IvanHoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU
14.0 - Komodo 5 64-bit
13.5 - Hiarcs 14 4CPU
13.5 - Stockfish 2.3.1 64-bit 4CPU
11.5 - DeepSaros 3.1a 64-bit 4CPU
11.0 - Chiron 1.5 64-bit 4CPU
10.0 - Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU
8.5 - Gull II b2 64-bit 4CPU
Round 30 PGN - http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... p?id=28077
Complete tournament PGN (zipped) - http://kirill-kryukov.com/chess/discuss ... p?id=28076
Here is a rating list based in this match only using my own Fortran programme (which does not read PGN files) and the EloSTAT algorithm in BayesElo:
Code: Select all
Round Robin with 16 engines and 30 games per engine.
Total number of games: 240 games.
3112.65 (engine 01).
3112.65 (engine 02).
3100.64 (engine 03).
3066.01 (engine 04).
3066.01 (engine 05).
3043.77 (engine 06).
3021.92 (engine 07).
3000.27 (engine 08).
2989.46 (engine 09).
2978.62 (engine 10).
2967.73 (engine 11).
2967.73 (engine 12).
2923.19 (engine 13).
2911.65 (engine 14).
2887.89 (engine 15).
2849.81 (engine 16).
Mean of ratings: 3000.00 Elo.
Code: Select all
Rank Name Elo Diff + - Games Score Oppo. Draws Win W-L-D
1 Critter 1.6a 64-bit 4CPU 3113.16 0.00 92.80 78.53 30 66.67% 2992.46 53.33% 40.00% 12-2-16
2 Rybka 4.1 64-bit 4CPU 3113.16 -0.00 102.43 85.27 30 66.67% 2992.46 46.67% 43.33% 13-3-14
3 Houdini 3 64-bit 4CPU 3101.09 -12.07 97.08 82.87 30 65.00% 2993.26 50.00% 40.00% 12-3-15
4 Sting SF 2 64-bit 4CPU 3066.31 -34.78 82.88 75.55 30 60.00% 2995.58 60.00% 30.00% 9-3-18
5 Strelka 5.5 64-bit 3066.31 -0.00 82.88 75.55 30 60.00% 2995.58 60.00% 30.00% 9-3-18
6 Vitruvius 1.11C 64-bit 4CPU 3043.96 -22.34 89.59 83.72 30 56.67% 2997.07 53.33% 30.00% 9-5-16
7 Bouquet 1.5 64-bit 4CPU 3022.02 -21.94 56.30 55.10 30 53.33% 2998.53 80.00% 13.33% 4-2-24
8 Equinox 1.60 64-bit 4CPU 3000.27 -21.75 86.69 86.69 30 50.00% 2999.98 53.33% 23.33% 7-7-16
9 IvanHoe 9.46h 64-bit 4CPU 2989.41 -10.86 68.48 69.40 30 48.33% 3000.71 70.00% 13.33% 4-5-21
10 Komodo 5 64-bit 2978.52 -10.89 78.69 81.19 30 46.67% 3001.43 60.00% 16.67% 5-7-18
11 Hiarcs 14 4CPU 2967.59 -10.93 81.28 85.35 30 45.00% 3002.16 56.67% 16.67% 5-8-17
12 Stockfish 2.3.1 64-bit 4CPU 2967.59 -0.00 67.16 69.90 30 45.00% 3002.16 70.00% 10.00% 3-6-21
13 DeepSaros 3.1a 64-bit 4CPU 2922.84 -44.75 78.05 87.38 30 38.33% 3005.14 56.67% 10.00% 3-10-17
14 Chiron 1.5 64-bit 4CPU 2911.26 -11.58 86.82 100.54 30 36.67% 3005.92 46.67% 13.33% 4-12-14
15 Naum 4.2 64-bit 4CPU 2887.38 -23.88 78.53 92.80 30 33.33% 3007.51 53.33% 6.67% 2-12-16
16 Gull II b2 64-bit 4CPU 2849.14 -38.25 70.24 85.46 30 28.33% 3010.06 56.67% 0.00% 0-13-17
Code: Select all
Max.(EloSTAT) - min.(EloSTAT) ~ 3113.16 - 2849.14 = 264.02 Elo.
Max.(my programme) - min.(my programme) ~ 3112.65 - 2849.81 = 262.84 Elo.
264.02/262.84 ~ 1.0045; 262.84/264.02 ~ 0.9955
I stay tuned for the next 8 CPU Swiss tournament!
Regards from Spain.
Ajedrecista.
-
- Posts: 175
- Joined: Wed Apr 28, 2010 9:31 pm
- Location: Brazil
Re: Round 29
Graham You are great! I am your fan.
Thanks for the great work.
honestly;
Carlos Ylich

Thanks for the great work.
honestly;
Carlos Ylich


Remember Sabra and Chatila