Strongest Sacificial Chess Engine

[reflectionofpower]

But is a sac by a chess engine really a sacrifice? Do they not calculate every little nuance which makes them so good in defense that a sac will not work?

Yes sometimes or often for some programs it's really a sacrifice.
All depends on evaluation and the program will happily play whatever sac a quality for that f3/f6 knight, sac pawns for passed pawns, always incorrect and always losing! But always very happy doing so which is what counts.

What I am saying though is that for an engine to make a sacrifice it has to be calculated thoroughly or it will lose. This is especially the case verse another strong chess program. So if a program sacrifices it should see some type of winning advantage against a program or it will lose.

When a human sacrifices it's a whole different ball game. You are putting the psychological wedge in your opponent's game to lose under pressure, have him not find the most accurate defense (Tal) or have the clock run him down. As a human through intuition or feel you know it's the right move and you make it.

I forgot to mention for humans that MChess Pro & WChess were excellent examples of sacrificial play and would make for exciting games. I seem to recall WChess giving up material and such for making a position dynamically unbalanced. MCHess has the Urusov Gambit as it's favorite line and that program at the time had learning capacity.

[neelbasant]

What a surprise !!!

I think Vitrivius series engines are best when comes sacrifices.
And strong too.

[carldaman]

Chiron is really an inexpensive engine. It plays very good attacking chess, often involving sacs. I recall I once posted a great win by Chiron over Deep Rybka 4.1, involving a spectacular Bxh7+ sacrifice.

Regards,
CL

But is a sac by a chess engine really a sacrifice? Do they not calculate every little nuance which makes them so good in defense that a sac will not work?

Can you post this game? I have Chrion 2.0 and I have never seen it as a sacrificial engine. It's very strong all around and wicked fast with the ply butter.

The Bxh7 game was against Shredder. The win vs Rybka featured a pawn sac for long term initiative. It was posted here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 64&t=44425

Here's the Bxh7 win vs Shredder:

[pgn]

[Event "Revving Up The V8s (8 cores)"]
[Site "Auckland"]
[Date "2012.07.10"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Chiron 1.1a 64bit"]
[Black "Deep Shredder 12 x64"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E56"]
[Annotator "0.30;0.07"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "2012.07.11"]
[TimeControl "40/2400:40/2400:40/2400"]

{Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5430 @ 2.66GHz 2659 MHz W=24.1 plies; 2, 671kN/s; 10
TBAs; SuP2012LV.ctg B=16.6 plies; 3,658kN/s; SuP2012LV.ctg} 1. d4 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Nf6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 2. c4 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} e6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 3. Nc3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Bb4 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 4. e3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} O-O {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 5. Bd3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} d5 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 6. Nf3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} c5 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 7. O-O {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Nc6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 8. h3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} cxd4 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 9. cxd5 {
[%eval 30,23] [%emt 0:01:41]} Nxd5 {[%eval 7,19] [%emt 0:02:30]} 10. Nxd5 {
[%eval 27,23] [%emt 0:01:25]} Qxd5 {[%eval 3,16] [%emt 0:00:08]} 11. exd4 {
[%eval 34,23] [%emt 0:03:42]} Ba5 {[%eval 16,19] [%emt 0:03:44] (Bd7)} 12. Be3
{[%eval 46,23] [%emt 0:02:18]} Bb6 {[%eval 19,19] [%emt 0:01:47]} 13. Rc1 {
[%eval 39,23] [%emt 0:03:53] (Qc2)} Qxa2 {[%eval 1,17] [%emt 0:00:15] (h6)} 14.
Bxh7+ {[%eval 207,25] [%emt 0:00:55] (Ng5)} Kxh7 {[%eval 2,16] [%emt 0:01:03]}
15. Ng5+ {[%eval 230,24] [%emt 0:01:37]} Kg6 {[%eval 3,16] [%emt 0:01:19]} 16.
Qg4 {[%eval 230,26] [%emt 0:00:46]} f5 {[%eval 3,15] [%emt 0:02:10]} 17. Qg3 {
[%eval 230,24] [%emt 0:01:11]} Rf7 {[%eval 91,15] [%emt 0:04:44] (Re8)} 18. Qh4
{[%eval 264,24] [%emt 0:01:28]} Qd5 {[%eval 16,15] [%emt 0:00:42] (Rf8)} 19.
Qh7+ {[%eval 398,23] [%emt 0:02:00] (g4)} Kf6 {[%eval 1,10] [%emt 0:00:00]} 20.
Qg8 {[%eval 445,25] [%emt 0:00:55] (Nxf7)} Nd8 {[%eval 277,18] [%emt 0:02:12]
(Qd7)} 21. Nf3 {[%eval 540,24] [%emt 0:00:40] (h4)} f4 {[%eval 451,17] [%emt 0:
01:56]} 22. Bxf4 {[%eval 540,23] [%emt 0:00:04]} Qh5 {[%eval 460,16] [%emt 0:
00:52] (Bd7)} 23. Rfe1 {[%eval 713,23] [%emt 0:01:00] (Bg5+)} Qf5 {[%eval 554,
17] [%emt 0:02:43] (Bd7)} 24. Bd2 {[%eval 719,23] [%emt 0:01:02] (Bg5+)} Ke7 {
[%eval 752,17] [%emt 0:02:13] (Bd7)} 25. Bb4+ {[%eval -30002,24] [%emt 0:00:58]
} Kf6 {[%eval 757,18] [%emt 0:00:55]} 26. Re5 {[%eval 941,26] [%emt 0:00:58]}
Qf4 {[%eval 766,17] [%emt 0:00:45]} 27. Bd2 {[%eval -30002,27] [%emt 0:00:58]}
1-0

[/pgn]

Both games were from one of Graham B's 8-core tournaments (from 2012).

Regards,
CL

[reflectionofpower]

What a surprise !!!

I think Vitrivius series engines are best when comes sacrifices.
And strong too.

Yea, I agree

[reflectionofpower]

The Bxh7 game was against Shredder. The win vs Rybka featured a pawn sac for long term initiative. It was posted here:

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 64&t=44425

Here's the Bxh7 win vs Shredder:

[pgn]

[Event "Revving Up The V8s (8 cores)"]
[Site "Auckland"]
[Date "2012.07.10"]
[Round "7"]
[White "Chiron 1.1a 64bit"]
[Black "Deep Shredder 12 x64"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "E56"]
[Annotator "0.30;0.07"]
[PlyCount "53"]
[EventDate "2012.07.11"]
[TimeControl "40/2400:40/2400:40/2400"]

{Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5430 @ 2.66GHz 2659 MHz W=24.1 plies; 2, 671kN/s; 10
TBAs; SuP2012LV.ctg B=16.6 plies; 3,658kN/s; SuP2012LV.ctg} 1. d4 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Nf6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 2. c4 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} e6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 3. Nc3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Bb4 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 4. e3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} O-O {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 5. Bd3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} d5 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 6. Nf3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} c5 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 7. O-O {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} Nc6 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 8. h3 {[%eval
-30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} cxd4 {[%eval -30002,0] [%emt 0:00:00]} 9. cxd5 {
[%eval 30,23] [%emt 0:01:41]} Nxd5 {[%eval 7,19] [%emt 0:02:30]} 10. Nxd5 {
[%eval 27,23] [%emt 0:01:25]} Qxd5 {[%eval 3,16] [%emt 0:00:08]} 11. exd4 {
[%eval 34,23] [%emt 0:03:42]} Ba5 {[%eval 16,19] [%emt 0:03:44] (Bd7)} 12. Be3
{[%eval 46,23] [%emt 0:02:18]} Bb6 {[%eval 19,19] [%emt 0:01:47]} 13. Rc1 {
[%eval 39,23] [%emt 0:03:53] (Qc2)} Qxa2 {[%eval 1,17] [%emt 0:00:15] (h6)} 14.
Bxh7+ {[%eval 207,25] [%emt 0:00:55] (Ng5)} Kxh7 {[%eval 2,16] [%emt 0:01:03]}
15. Ng5+ {[%eval 230,24] [%emt 0:01:37]} Kg6 {[%eval 3,16] [%emt 0:01:19]} 16.
Qg4 {[%eval 230,26] [%emt 0:00:46]} f5 {[%eval 3,15] [%emt 0:02:10]} 17. Qg3 {
[%eval 230,24] [%emt 0:01:11]} Rf7 {[%eval 91,15] [%emt 0:04:44] (Re8)} 18. Qh4
{[%eval 264,24] [%emt 0:01:28]} Qd5 {[%eval 16,15] [%emt 0:00:42] (Rf8)} 19.
Qh7+ {[%eval 398,23] [%emt 0:02:00] (g4)} Kf6 {[%eval 1,10] [%emt 0:00:00]} 20.
Qg8 {[%eval 445,25] [%emt 0:00:55] (Nxf7)} Nd8 {[%eval 277,18] [%emt 0:02:12]
(Qd7)} 21. Nf3 {[%eval 540,24] [%emt 0:00:40] (h4)} f4 {[%eval 451,17] [%emt 0:
01:56]} 22. Bxf4 {[%eval 540,23] [%emt 0:00:04]} Qh5 {[%eval 460,16] [%emt 0:
00:52] (Bd7)} 23. Rfe1 {[%eval 713,23] [%emt 0:01:00] (Bg5+)} Qf5 {[%eval 554,
17] [%emt 0:02:43] (Bd7)} 24. Bd2 {[%eval 719,23] [%emt 0:01:02] (Bg5+)} Ke7 {
[%eval 752,17] [%emt 0:02:13] (Bd7)} 25. Bb4+ {[%eval -30002,24] [%emt 0:00:58]
} Kf6 {[%eval 757,18] [%emt 0:00:55]} 26. Re5 {[%eval 941,26] [%emt 0:00:58]}
Qf4 {[%eval 766,17] [%emt 0:00:45]} 27. Bd2 {[%eval -30002,27] [%emt 0:00:58]}
1-0

[/pgn]

Both games were from one of Graham B's 8-core tournaments (from 2012).

Regards,
CL

Ironically Chiron 2.0 does not like Bxh7+, Houdini 4 & SF find it pretty fast but Zappa Mexico II (DS) & Deep Junior (psycho) find it instantly. Critter 1.6a liked it too

On the Nd4 move SF,Chiron 2.0 like it, a few other enignes did too.

[reflectionofpower]

Actually I would say Houdini 4 is the strongest sacrificial engine believe it or not. I never used it for analysis on my games and then I started using it and I liked the ideas it threw up at me. Someone said on here it was,"opportunistic & lethal" "WChess on steroids" I believe it. These are accurate statements.

Not in the sense that it is reckless but when it pushes the envelope of a position it does it with a scientific psychosis.

[AdminX]

Actually I would say Houdini 4 is the strongest sacrificial engine believe it or not. I never used it for analysis on my games and then I started using it and I liked the ideas it threw up at me. Someone said on here it was,"opportunistic & lethal" "WChess on steroids" I believe it. These are accurate statements.

Not in the sense that it is reckless but when it pushes the envelope of a position it does it with a scientific psychosis.

I agree, matter of fact is, the whole time I have been reading this thread I have been think about this Rybka vs Houdini game.

[pgn]
[Event "TCEC Houdini - Rybka Match"]
[Site "http://www.tcec-chess.org"]
[Date "2011.01.28"]
[EventDate "2011.01.28"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Rybka (Computer)"]
[Black "Houdini (Computer)"]
[ECO "B22"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "106"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Bc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 c4
7. Bc2 Qc7 8. Qe2 g5 9. e6 dxe6 10. Nxg5 Qe5 11. d4 Qxe2+
12. Kxe2 e5 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Nxh7 Bg7 15. Ng5 Bd7 16. Na3 Nd3
17. Bxd3 cxd3+ 18. Kxd3 Na4 19. f3 a5 20. Ne4 f5 21. Nf2 b5
22. Nc2 b4 23. cxb4 Kf7 24. bxa5 Rxa5 25. Kd2 Rd8 26. Nb4 Re5
27. Nfd3 Bb5 28. Re1 Nc5 29. Rxe5 Bxe5 30. f4 Bf6 31. Ke1
Nxd3+ 32. Nxd3 Bxd3 33. a4 Rc8 34. a5 Rc2 35. Bd2 Rxb2 36. a6
Be4 37. Ra3 Bxg2 38. a7 Rb1+ 39. Ke2 Ba8 40. Be1 Bd4 41. Ra2
Rb3 42. Bg3 Ke6 43. Kf1 Bc5 44. Ke2 Kd7 45. Kf1 Rb4 46. Ke1
Bd6 47. Kf2 Bxf4 48. h4 Bh6 49. Kf1 Rb1+ 50. Be1 e5 51. h5 f4
52. Rd2+ Kc7 53. Rc2+ Kb6 0-1
[/pgn]

[reflectionofpower]

Actually I would say Houdini 4 is the strongest sacrificial engine believe it or not. I never used it for analysis on my games and then I started using it and I liked the ideas it threw up at me. Someone said on here it was,"opportunistic & lethal" "WChess on steroids" I believe it. These are accurate statements.

Not in the sense that it is reckless but when it pushes the envelope of a position it does it with a scientific psychosis.

I agree, matter of fact is, the whole time I have been reading this thread I have been think about this Rybka vs Houdini game.

[pgn]
[Event "TCEC Houdini - Rybka Match"]
[Site "http://www.tcec-chess.org"]
[Date "2011.01.28"]
[EventDate "2011.01.28"]
[Round "1"]
[Result "0-1"]
[White "Rybka (Computer)"]
[Black "Houdini (Computer)"]
[ECO "B22"]
[WhiteElo "?"]
[BlackElo "?"]
[PlyCount "106"]

1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. Nf3 Nc6 5. Bc4 Nb6 6. Bb3 c4
7. Bc2 Qc7 8. Qe2 g5 9. e6 dxe6 10. Nxg5 Qe5 11. d4 Qxe2+
12. Kxe2 e5 13. dxe5 Nxe5 14. Nxh7 Bg7 15. Ng5 Bd7 16. Na3 Nd3
17. Bxd3 cxd3+ 18. Kxd3 Na4 19. f3 a5 20. Ne4 f5 21. Nf2 b5
22. Nc2 b4 23. cxb4 Kf7 24. bxa5 Rxa5 25. Kd2 Rd8 26. Nb4 Re5
27. Nfd3 Bb5 28. Re1 Nc5 29. Rxe5 Bxe5 30. f4 Bf6 31. Ke1
Nxd3+ 32. Nxd3 Bxd3 33. a4 Rc8 34. a5 Rc2 35. Bd2 Rxb2 36. a6
Be4 37. Ra3 Bxg2 38. a7 Rb1+ 39. Ke2 Ba8 40. Be1 Bd4 41. Ra2
Rb3 42. Bg3 Ke6 43. Kf1 Bc5 44. Ke2 Kd7 45. Kf1 Rb4 46. Ke1
Bd6 47. Kf2 Bxf4 48. h4 Bh6 49. Kf1 Rb1+ 50. Be1 e5 51. h5 f4
52. Rd2+ Kc7 53. Rc2+ Kb6 0-1
[/pgn]

8)...g5!? talks to me and says,"Balls of Steel" time to attack and against Rbyka which is no slouch in the defensive department.

[TShackel]

I just wanted to reiterate that that game against rybka was houdini 1.5a ifi my memory serves correctly. I've gone through hundreds and hundreds of Houdini 4.0 games and have never seen it sacrifice much at all. Chiron is an engine I'm not familiar with though, so I was interested as to if it sacrifices as well. I actually preferred theh style of Houdini 1.5 over Houdini 4.0 to tell you the truth, but Robert Houdart must've felt theh elo gains were substantial in order to somewhat change the style of the engine from 1.5 and go for elo.

Sincerely,

Tim Shackel.

[reflectionofpower]

I just wanted to reiterate that that game against rybka was houdini 1.5a ifi my memory serves correctly. I've gone through hundreds and hundreds of Houdini 4.0 games and have never seen it sacrifice much at all. Chiron is an engine I'm not familiar with though, so I was interested as to if it sacrifices as well. I actually preferred theh style of Houdini 1.5 over Houdini 4.0 to tell you the truth, but Robert Houdart must've felt theh elo gains were substantial in order to somewhat change the style of the engine from 1.5 and go for elo.

Sincerely,

Tim Shackel.

My Houdini 4.0 gets it instantly but that's because I have learn file activated. When it first looked at it raw it took about 20-25 seconds from what I recollect on my i7 at 4 cores.

I never played around with Houdini 1.5 but I just downloaded it off Houdini's site as it's free and it finds 8)...g5 instantly :.)

This was a good thread that Tim started. I like it.