Carlsen vs. CCRL 2850 engines in Rapid?

[lkaufman]

In 1999 Fritz 5.32 beats Judit Polgar with a 5.5-2.5 score at 30 minutes per game match. The performance of Fritz 5.32 at this match is 2814 elo.
Fritz 5.32 had played on a Pentium II/350 Mhz hardware. Fritz 5.32 is ~100 elo weaker than Fritz 8. The rating of Fritz 8 Bilbao is 2700 elo at CCRL 40/15 rating list.
In 1998 Rebel beat Anand at 2 semi-blitz games (15 minutes) match with a 1.5- 0.5 score (2986 elo performance). At 4 blitz games (5 min + 5 sec) Rebel beat Anand with a 3-1 score (2986 elo performance). Rebel had played on a K6-2 450 Mhz hardware. Anand had 2795 elo at 1998 July.
Fritz 5.32 at Pentium II/350 Mhz and Rebel K6-2 450 Mhz probably have a rating of around 2400 elo for CCRL (40/15).

Considering that Magnus Carlsen is the best player in history in rapid games a 2400-2450 elo chess engine has a low change to beat him.
But a chess engine around 2600 CCRL elo can beat Magnus Carlsen without much difficulty at rapid games.

The first result you mention is the most relevant since 5' + 10" Rapid is about like game in 25'. I think that a 2800 player today is a stronger Rapid player than a 2800 player of 20 years ago, due to getting so much more practice at fast play on the internet, but even so I agree with you that somewhere between 2450 and 2600 CCRL Rapid (let's say 2525, the middle) would be an equal opponent for Magnus in Rapid based on this historical evidence. But that's roughly Skill level 22 on Komodo Dragon 2, which was a close opponent for Jorge Sammour, whose FIDE is only 2458, four hundred elo below Carlsen! So I'm having a really tough time reconciling these facts. Obviously the crippled dragon plays quite differently than a full strength twenty year old engine, but it's not obvious why it would perform much worse vs. humans than an engine of equal strength based on direct play. Some mystery here....

At what time control you can give GM Nakamura a Knight Odds, can Komodo Dragon 2 beat him at at TC 10'+5" ?

Sorry meant to write TC 5'+10" Not the other way around

If you have been following our events, you should know that this is silly. We were about even giving GM Lenderman knight odds at time controls averaging around 6' + 1", and that was with draws counting as wins for Dragon. Lenderman is a pretty strong GM, but he's no Hikaru Nakamura. The fair time control for Nakamura at knight odds would be something like 2' + 1" or even 1' + 1". I believe that in a few years we'll be able to give knight odds to Nakamura (or another 2800+ FIDE Rapid player) at 15' + 10" rapid, but not by just improving the engine; it will require a breakthru in terms of setting problems for falllible, human opponents, not just playing to postpone losing.

Well I meant probably in 5 years from now with Computer 3 times stronger and much better chess algorithm, and probably at TC 5'+10", will it ever be possible ?

You wrote "Dragon 2", I guess you meant "Dragon 7" or so. We don't need faster computers or better chess algorithms to do this, we need to create a program specifically designed for the goal. I actually think I know how we could do it with current technology, but it would take some time to implement and more time to perfect. Not an easy task, but beating Stockfish is also not an easy task; not sure which is harder! By the way, based on games I've run so far at Rapid (15' + 10") tc against CCRL engines, the CCRL ratings for Dragon 2 Skill levels 21 thru 24 would be about 2070, 2331, 2556, and 2668 respectively. So since your friend Jorge appeared to be midway between levels 21 and 22 at that time control, it would seem that about 2200 CCRL is equal to about 2450 FIDE at that Rapid tc. This seems reasonably consistent with opinions expressed here. It's still a bit strange that Dragon can give knight odds to level 23 with fairly even results, but only performed (in 15 Rapid games vs. GM and IM humans) at 2460 FIDE, same as your friend Jorge is rated roughly.

[Chessqueen]

In 1999 Fritz 5.32 beats Judit Polgar with a 5.5-2.5 score at 30 minutes per game match. The performance of Fritz 5.32 at this match is 2814 elo.
Fritz 5.32 had played on a Pentium II/350 Mhz hardware. Fritz 5.32 is ~100 elo weaker than Fritz 8. The rating of Fritz 8 Bilbao is 2700 elo at CCRL 40/15 rating list.
In 1998 Rebel beat Anand at 2 semi-blitz games (15 minutes) match with a 1.5- 0.5 score (2986 elo performance). At 4 blitz games (5 min + 5 sec) Rebel beat Anand with a 3-1 score (2986 elo performance). Rebel had played on a K6-2 450 Mhz hardware. Anand had 2795 elo at 1998 July.
Fritz 5.32 at Pentium II/350 Mhz and Rebel K6-2 450 Mhz probably have a rating of around 2400 elo for CCRL (40/15).

Considering that Magnus Carlsen is the best player in history in rapid games a 2400-2450 elo chess engine has a low change to beat him.
But a chess engine around 2600 CCRL elo can beat Magnus Carlsen without much difficulty at rapid games.

The first result you mention is the most relevant since 5' + 10" Rapid is about like game in 25'. I think that a 2800 player today is a stronger Rapid player than a 2800 player of 20 years ago, due to getting so much more practice at fast play on the internet, but even so I agree with you that somewhere between 2450 and 2600 CCRL Rapid (let's say 2525, the middle) would be an equal opponent for Magnus in Rapid based on this historical evidence. But that's roughly Skill level 22 on Komodo Dragon 2, which was a close opponent for Jorge Sammour, whose FIDE is only 2458, four hundred elo below Carlsen! So I'm having a really tough time reconciling these facts. Obviously the crippled dragon plays quite differently than a full strength twenty year old engine, but it's not obvious why it would perform much worse vs. humans than an engine of equal strength based on direct play. Some mystery here....

At what time control you can give GM Nakamura a Knight Odds, can Komodo Dragon 2 beat him at at TC 10'+5" ?

Sorry meant to write TC 5'+10" Not the other way around

If you have been following our events, you should know that this is silly. We were about even giving GM Lenderman knight odds at time controls averaging around 6' + 1", and that was with draws counting as wins for Dragon. Lenderman is a pretty strong GM, but he's no Hikaru Nakamura. The fair time control for Nakamura at knight odds would be something like 2' + 1" or even 1' + 1". I believe that in a few years we'll be able to give knight odds to Nakamura (or another 2800+ FIDE Rapid player) at 15' + 10" rapid, but not by just improving the engine; it will require a breakthru in terms of setting problems for falllible, human opponents, not just playing to postpone losing.

Well I meant probably in 5 years from now with Computer 3 times stronger and much better chess algorithm, and probably at TC 5'+10", will it ever be possible ?

You wrote "Dragon 2", I guess you meant "Dragon 7" or so. We don't need faster computers or better chess algorithms to do this, we need to create a program specifically designed for the goal. I actually think I know how we could do it with current technology, but it would take some time to implement and more time to perfect. Not an easy task, but beating Stockfish is also not an easy task; not sure which is harder! By the way, based on games I've run so far at Rapid (15' + 10") tc against CCRL engines, the CCRL ratings for Dragon 2 Skill levels 21 thru 24 would be about 2070, 2331, 2556, and 2668 respectively. So since your friend Jorge appeared to be midway between levels 21 and 22 at that time control, it would seem that about 2200 CCRL is equal to about 2450 FIDE at that Rapid tc. This seems reasonably consistent with opinions expressed here. It's still a bit strange that Dragon can give knight odds to level 23 with fairly even results, but only performed (in 15 Rapid games vs. GM and IM humans) at 2460 FIDE, same as your friend Jorge is rated roughly.

This might be true based on computer engines versus engines matches that from Skill Level 22 thru 23 it jumped from 2331 to 2556, but against Human GMs I do NOT believe that Skill 23 would be playing even against a Human FIDE rated 2553 at TC 15'+10". I believe that most of the engines that you selected do NOT know how to trade with an extra Knight Whereas humans rated around 2550 would force the trade of pieces immediately

[lkaufman]

In 1999 Fritz 5.32 beats Judit Polgar with a 5.5-2.5 score at 30 minutes per game match. The performance of Fritz 5.32 at this match is 2814 elo.
Fritz 5.32 had played on a Pentium II/350 Mhz hardware. Fritz 5.32 is ~100 elo weaker than Fritz 8. The rating of Fritz 8 Bilbao is 2700 elo at CCRL 40/15 rating list.
In 1998 Rebel beat Anand at 2 semi-blitz games (15 minutes) match with a 1.5- 0.5 score (2986 elo performance). At 4 blitz games (5 min + 5 sec) Rebel beat Anand with a 3-1 score (2986 elo performance). Rebel had played on a K6-2 450 Mhz hardware. Anand had 2795 elo at 1998 July.
Fritz 5.32 at Pentium II/350 Mhz and Rebel K6-2 450 Mhz probably have a rating of around 2400 elo for CCRL (40/15).

Considering that Magnus Carlsen is the best player in history in rapid games a 2400-2450 elo chess engine has a low change to beat him.
But a chess engine around 2600 CCRL elo can beat Magnus Carlsen without much difficulty at rapid games.

The first result you mention is the most relevant since 5' + 10" Rapid is about like game in 25'. I think that a 2800 player today is a stronger Rapid player than a 2800 player of 20 years ago, due to getting so much more practice at fast play on the internet, but even so I agree with you that somewhere between 2450 and 2600 CCRL Rapid (let's say 2525, the middle) would be an equal opponent for Magnus in Rapid based on this historical evidence. But that's roughly Skill level 22 on Komodo Dragon 2, which was a close opponent for Jorge Sammour, whose FIDE is only 2458, four hundred elo below Carlsen! So I'm having a really tough time reconciling these facts. Obviously the crippled dragon plays quite differently than a full strength twenty year old engine, but it's not obvious why it would perform much worse vs. humans than an engine of equal strength based on direct play. Some mystery here....

At what time control you can give GM Nakamura a Knight Odds, can Komodo Dragon 2 beat him at at TC 10'+5" ?

Sorry meant to write TC 5'+10" Not the other way around

If you have been following our events, you should know that this is silly. We were about even giving GM Lenderman knight odds at time controls averaging around 6' + 1", and that was with draws counting as wins for Dragon. Lenderman is a pretty strong GM, but he's no Hikaru Nakamura. The fair time control for Nakamura at knight odds would be something like 2' + 1" or even 1' + 1". I believe that in a few years we'll be able to give knight odds to Nakamura (or another 2800+ FIDE Rapid player) at 15' + 10" rapid, but not by just improving the engine; it will require a breakthru in terms of setting problems for falllible, human opponents, not just playing to postpone losing.

Well I meant probably in 5 years from now with Computer 3 times stronger and much better chess algorithm, and probably at TC 5'+10", will it ever be possible ?

You wrote "Dragon 2", I guess you meant "Dragon 7" or so. We don't need faster computers or better chess algorithms to do this, we need to create a program specifically designed for the goal. I actually think I know how we could do it with current technology, but it would take some time to implement and more time to perfect. Not an easy task, but beating Stockfish is also not an easy task; not sure which is harder! By the way, based on games I've run so far at Rapid (15' + 10") tc against CCRL engines, the CCRL ratings for Dragon 2 Skill levels 21 thru 24 would be about 2070, 2331, 2556, and 2668 respectively. So since your friend Jorge appeared to be midway between levels 21 and 22 at that time control, it would seem that about 2200 CCRL is equal to about 2450 FIDE at that Rapid tc. This seems reasonably consistent with opinions expressed here. It's still a bit strange that Dragon can give knight odds to level 23 with fairly even results, but only performed (in 15 Rapid games vs. GM and IM humans) at 2460 FIDE, same as your friend Jorge is rated roughly.

This might be true based on computer engines versus engines matches that from Skill Level 22 thru 23 it jumped from 2331 to 2556, but against Human GMs I do NOT believe that Skill 23 would be playing even against a Human FIDE rated 2553 at TC 15'+10". I believe that most of the engines that you selected do NOT know how to trade with an extra Knight Whereas humans rated around 2550 would force the trade of pieces immediately

I think you are missing my point. Dragon 2 Skill level 23 (with appropriate negative contempt) is only about an even match for full strength Dragon 2 (with appropriate positive Contempt) at knight odds in Rapid, even though both players fully understand the importance of trading when ahead. Dragon 2 Skill 23 does much better at this than normal engines do that are equal with it in normal chess, but still much worse than a similar strength (roughly FIDE 2700) human would do with knight odds. It's probably because Dragon 2 Skill 23 (like any engine) doesn't know that it must avoid tactical complications against a much stronger opponent; it knows to trade pieces, but humans also know that they just can't calculate as well as the engine, so they tend to "trust" it, which another engine would never do without very special programming.

[xr_a_y]

A major question would be the book. If the human player is allowed to play some anti-computer opening (like the hippo) and lock the game, it is probably very different than testing them on some current main lines or on some aggressive gambits.

[Chessqueen]

A major question would be the book. If the human player is allowed to play some anti-computer opening (like the hippo) and lock the game, it is probably very different than testing them on some current main lines or on some aggressive gambits.

This question was asked before on Youtube ==>

[amanjpro]

A major question would be the book. If the human player is allowed to play some anti-computer opening (like the hippo) and lock the game, it is probably very different than testing them on some current main lines or on some aggressive gambits.

If we want to know how strong an engine is, then there should be no opening book. The engine come with his default book, human comes with his own.

If we want to know if the engine is good for abalysing human play, then an opening book is necessary

[lkaufman]

A major question would be the book. If the human player is allowed to play some anti-computer opening (like the hippo) and lock the game, it is probably very different than testing them on some current main lines or on some aggressive gambits.

Playing the hippo and locking the game are two very different things. The humans are free to choose whatever openings they want to choose, the engines should have a variety opening book to avoid repeat openings. Assuming the human and the engine are roughly equal in strength, locking up the game to make a draw doesn't affect the ratings, it wouldn't be a useful strategy. Aiming for closed positions with play remaining is good strategy, and humans should do that. The engines should aim for open positions.

[lkaufman]

A major question would be the book. If the human player is allowed to play some anti-computer opening (like the hippo) and lock the game, it is probably very different than testing them on some current main lines or on some aggressive gambits.

If we want to know how strong an engine is, then there should be no opening book. The engine come with his default book, human comes with his own.

If we want to know if the engine is good for abalysing human play, then an opening book is necessary

Not all engines come with a default book, and some may have minimal variety, which would let the human improve from each game. In theory a book could be tailored to suit a particular engine, but I don't think many engine authors bother with that nowadays. Better to use some standard book that is the same for all engines in variety mode, whatever is the most popular book now, maybe one that is just representative of human master play. The human should be free to play whatever he likes.

[Milos]

In 1999 Fritz 5.32 beats Judit Polgar with a 5.5-2.5 score at 30 minutes per game match. The performance of Fritz 5.32 at this match is 2814 elo.
Fritz 5.32 had played on a Pentium II/350 Mhz hardware. Fritz 5.32 is ~100 elo weaker than Fritz 8. The rating of Fritz 8 Bilbao is 2700 elo at CCRL 40/15 rating list.
In 1998 Rebel beat Anand at 2 semi-blitz games (15 minutes) match with a 1.5- 0.5 score (2986 elo performance). At 4 blitz games (5 min + 5 sec) Rebel beat Anand with a 3-1 score (2986 elo performance). Rebel had played on a K6-2 450 Mhz hardware. Anand had 2795 elo at 1998 July.
Fritz 5.32 at Pentium II/350 Mhz and Rebel K6-2 450 Mhz probably have a rating of around 2400 elo for CCRL (40/15).

Considering that Magnus Carlsen is the best player in history in rapid games a 2400-2450 elo chess engine has a low change to beat him.
But a chess engine around 2600 CCRL elo can beat Magnus Carlsen without much difficulty at rapid games.

The first result you mention is the most relevant since 5' + 10" Rapid is about like game in 25'. I think that a 2800 player today is a stronger Rapid player than a 2800 player of 20 years ago, due to getting so much more practice at fast play on the internet, but even so I agree with you that somewhere between 2450 and 2600 CCRL Rapid (let's say 2525, the middle) would be an equal opponent for Magnus in Rapid based on this historical evidence. But that's roughly Skill level 22 on Komodo Dragon 2, which was a close opponent for Jorge Sammour, whose FIDE is only 2458, four hundred elo below Carlsen! So I'm having a really tough time reconciling these facts. Obviously the crippled dragon plays quite differently than a full strength twenty year old engine, but it's not obvious why it would perform much worse vs. humans than an engine of equal strength based on direct play. Some mystery here....

At what time control you can give GM Nakamura a Knight Odds, can Komodo Dragon 2 beat him at at TC 10'+5" ?

Sorry meant to write TC 5'+10" Not the other way around

If you have been following our events, you should know that this is silly. We were about even giving GM Lenderman knight odds at time controls averaging around 6' + 1", and that was with draws counting as wins for Dragon. Lenderman is a pretty strong GM, but he's no Hikaru Nakamura. The fair time control for Nakamura at knight odds would be something like 2' + 1" or even 1' + 1". I believe that in a few years we'll be able to give knight odds to Nakamura (or another 2800+ FIDE Rapid player) at 15' + 10" rapid, but not by just improving the engine; it will require a breakthru in terms of setting problems for falllible, human opponents, not just playing to postpone losing.

Well I meant probably in 5 years from now with Computer 3 times stronger and much better chess algorithm, and probably at TC 5'+10", will it ever be possible ?

You wrote "Dragon 2", I guess you meant "Dragon 7" or so. We don't need faster computers or better chess algorithms to do this, we need to create a program specifically designed for the goal. I actually think I know how we could do it with current technology, but it would take some time to implement and more time to perfect. Not an easy task, but beating Stockfish is also not an easy task; not sure which is harder! By the way, based on games I've run so far at Rapid (15' + 10") tc against CCRL engines, the CCRL ratings for Dragon 2 Skill levels 21 thru 24 would be about 2070, 2331, 2556, and 2668 respectively. So since your friend Jorge appeared to be midway between levels 21 and 22 at that time control, it would seem that about 2200 CCRL is equal to about 2450 FIDE at that Rapid tc. This seems reasonably consistent with opinions expressed here. It's still a bit strange that Dragon can give knight odds to level 23 with fairly even results, but only performed (in 15 Rapid games vs. GM and IM humans) at 2460 FIDE, same as your friend Jorge is rated roughly.

I recently played ICCF game against a decent opponent (in terms of ranking, not in terms of actual understanding of the game) where I gave up a bishop for a pawn on move 8 by mistyping a move. The game dragged for almost a year and 100 moves before I finally lost it (I resigned on move 98 when SF eval went over +10, and on move 8 when I entered the wrong move it was +5).
Ofc against top human GM and FIDE TC I'd lose in probably 40 moves.

[amanjpro]

I was analyzing Mamedyarov and Rapport game today at the Sinquefield cup, with my engine Zahak (dev branch, which is 50 elos stronger than Zahak 5. Zahak 5 has CCRL rating 2712)

I used two threads, 1024MB Hash. And My engine found all the best moves and avoided all the blunders that happened in the game all in less than 1 minute per move... I know it is a small sample, but it somehow tells me, that at least for analysis, my engine is way stronger than top GMs