Rook odds match: human vs engines.

[Marcus9]

No it takes at least between 50 seconds to 1 minute and 10 seconds to finish a game NOT 5 to 10 seconds per game. In reality I time how long it took to finish this game and it took 1 minute and 10 seconds, and yesterday at around 2:50 PM you stated this "you said that you were going to start a match between Komodo 12 level 17 and Dragon 2.6 Elo 2300. I can bet that Komodo 12 will win."

1 minute per game with komodo 12 level 17 is insanely slow, you should remove any animation from GUI, better if you don't use GUI at all

[Fritz 0]

After 1300 and something games, Komodo 12 level 17 has +26 Elo against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000. This is a bit stronger than I predicted. Taking into account that now I am somewhat better than Komodo 12 level 17 at 15+10, and that I am only 1900 at chess.com rapid, there is some confusion. I estimated that Komodo 12 level 17 was about 1800, but it turns out that it's much stronger. There are only two logical answers - either I got qiute stronger than 1900 recently, or Dragon Elo 2000 is overestimated. Somehow I think that the letter is true.

There is a third plausible explanation, which I am inclined to believe. Dragon, using NNUE, is very different from Komodo, using hand-crafted eval. Dragon is dramatically stronger positionally, rarely making strategic/position errors which all HCE engines make. So for Dragon Elo 2000 to play near the level of Komodo 17 level 17 in direct matches, it has to be much weaker tactically (due to a much shorter search depth). Against humans even this shorter search is usually enough, and the vastly better positional play makes all the difference against humans, but in direct matches being outsearched by 3 plies or so is a really big deal. So even though you tend to beat Komodo 12 level 17, you might struggle against Dragon Elo 2000. But I would also say that if you can really make a plus score against Komodo 12 level 17, I think you must be stronger than 1900. I recall that level 17 was a pretty good match for average GMs in slow blitz (5' + 2"), and I can't imagine that a 2500 rated GM playing slow blitz would have much trouble beating a 1900 player playing Rapid. Do you have any other ratings you can quote, such as chess.com blitz, Fide, Lichess blitz or Rapid, etc.? I know they are not directly comparable, but I know how to convert from one scale to another reasonably well.

Larrry, I had made a typo, which I edited. I meant Komodo 12 level 14. So Komodo 12 level 14 is beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 by 20+ Elo. I surely can make a solid plus score against it at 15+10 recently. I can even put a decent resistance to it at 5'+5''. My Lichess blitz rating is slightly above 2000, and rapid slightly above 2100.

OK, that makes more sense. Lichess Rapid 2100 is pretty consistent with chess.com Rapid 1900 and also with FIDE 1900, so I guess that's a fair rating for you. In your above paragraph, when you say you make a solid plus score against "it", do you mean Komodo 12 level 14 or Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000? If you are actually beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 in Rapid I am concerned, as I am trying to get the Elo ratings right in Dragon 3, and Dragon 3 as currently planned will be weaker at Elo 2000 than Dragon 2.6 since I was convinced that Dragon 2.6 was too strong at elo settings anywhere near or above 2000. But if you are just projecting that you might beat it based on results vs. Komodo 12 I'm much less concerned, as explained above.

Actually, I have played only two games against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 at 15+10, and I won both. I've played much more against Komodo 12 level 14 and I have a clear plus, but don't know the exact result. I've noticed that Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 made unexpected tactical mistakes, or maybe speculative unsound sacrifices, which Komodo 12 level 14 didn't.

OK, well we did fix one particular type of blunder seen often with Elo settings around 2000 or so in Dragon 2.6 (or 2.6.1), basically blindness to "sham" sacrifices (moves that at first glance look like blunders but actually win material or mate). So while Dragon 3 at Elo 2000 will tend to lose to Dragon 2.6 at same Elo, it won't make such obvious blunders and so may be a better opponent for a human.

Are you planning to release Dragon 3.0 by the 1st week of May, and if so will Komodo 14.1 become Free or the price will be lower to only $19.99 ?

I hope so (by first week of May), but no promise. Probably we should then make Komodo 13 free (one up from current free Komodo 12), and reduce the price of Komodo 14.1, but we haven't discussed these details yet.

As far as I am concerned, you don't have to give anything for feee or to lower the price, but I have two appeals:

1. That Dragon 3 is realistic in 2000-2200 Elo range, if possible tested by humans of that class;
2. That Dragon 3 works in the Fritz GUI.

[Chessqueen]

After 1300 and something games, Komodo 12 level 17 has +26 Elo against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000. This is a bit stronger than I predicted. Taking into account that now I am somewhat better than Komodo 12 level 17 at 15+10, and that I am only 1900 at chess.com rapid, there is some confusion. I estimated that Komodo 12 level 17 was about 1800, but it turns out that it's much stronger. There are only two logical answers - either I got qiute stronger than 1900 recently, or Dragon Elo 2000 is overestimated. Somehow I think that the letter is true.

There is a third plausible explanation, which I am inclined to believe. Dragon, using NNUE, is very different from Komodo, using hand-crafted eval. Dragon is dramatically stronger positionally, rarely making strategic/position errors which all HCE engines make. So for Dragon Elo 2000 to play near the level of Komodo 17 level 17 in direct matches, it has to be much weaker tactically (due to a much shorter search depth). Against humans even this shorter search is usually enough, and the vastly better positional play makes all the difference against humans, but in direct matches being outsearched by 3 plies or so is a really big deal. So even though you tend to beat Komodo 12 level 17, you might struggle against Dragon Elo 2000. But I would also say that if you can really make a plus score against Komodo 12 level 17, I think you must be stronger than 1900. I recall that level 17 was a pretty good match for average GMs in slow blitz (5' + 2"), and I can't imagine that a 2500 rated GM playing slow blitz would have much trouble beating a 1900 player playing Rapid. Do you have any other ratings you can quote, such as chess.com blitz, Fide, Lichess blitz or Rapid, etc.? I know they are not directly comparable, but I know how to convert from one scale to another reasonably well.

Larrry, I had made a typo, which I edited. I meant Komodo 12 level 14. So Komodo 12 level 14 is beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 by 20+ Elo. I surely can make a solid plus score against it at 15+10 recently. I can even put a decent resistance to it at 5'+5''. My Lichess blitz rating is slightly above 2000, and rapid slightly above 2100.

OK, that makes more sense. Lichess Rapid 2100 is pretty consistent with chess.com Rapid 1900 and also with FIDE 1900, so I guess that's a fair rating for you. In your above paragraph, when you say you make a solid plus score against "it", do you mean Komodo 12 level 14 or Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000? If you are actually beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 in Rapid I am concerned, as I am trying to get the Elo ratings right in Dragon 3, and Dragon 3 as currently planned will be weaker at Elo 2000 than Dragon 2.6 since I was convinced that Dragon 2.6 was too strong at elo settings anywhere near or above 2000. But if you are just projecting that you might beat it based on results vs. Komodo 12 I'm much less concerned, as explained above.

Actually, I have played only two games against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 at 15+10, and I won both. I've played much more against Komodo 12 level 14 and I have a clear plus, but don't know the exact result. I've noticed that Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 made unexpected tactical mistakes, or maybe speculative unsound sacrifices, which Komodo 12 level 14 didn't.

OK, well we did fix one particular type of blunder seen often with Elo settings around 2000 or so in Dragon 2.6 (or 2.6.1), basically blindness to "sham" sacrifices (moves that at first glance look like blunders but actually win material or mate). So while Dragon 3 at Elo 2000 will tend to lose to Dragon 2.6 at same Elo, it won't make such obvious blunders and so may be a better opponent for a human.

Are you planning to release Dragon 3.0 by the 1st week of May, and if so will Komodo 14.1 become Free or the price will be lower to only $19.99 ?

I hope so (by first week of May), but no promise. Probably we should then make Komodo 13 free (one up from current free Komodo 12), and reduce the price of Komodo 14.1, but we haven't discussed these details yet.

That is a great marketing decision since there are Free Chess engine that are of the strength of Komodo 13, which will give some people that never purchased Komodo before a taste of Komodo. There are no engine out there yet that can give odds like Komodo to top human players.

Note: What is the maximum odds that Dragon 3 could give in the future to a Master and an IM at 30 Minutes per game.

[lkaufman]

After 1300 and something games, Komodo 12 level 17 has +26 Elo against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000. This is a bit stronger than I predicted. Taking into account that now I am somewhat better than Komodo 12 level 17 at 15+10, and that I am only 1900 at chess.com rapid, there is some confusion. I estimated that Komodo 12 level 17 was about 1800, but it turns out that it's much stronger. There are only two logical answers - either I got qiute stronger than 1900 recently, or Dragon Elo 2000 is overestimated. Somehow I think that the letter is true.

There is a third plausible explanation, which I am inclined to believe. Dragon, using NNUE, is very different from Komodo, using hand-crafted eval. Dragon is dramatically stronger positionally, rarely making strategic/position errors which all HCE engines make. So for Dragon Elo 2000 to play near the level of Komodo 17 level 17 in direct matches, it has to be much weaker tactically (due to a much shorter search depth). Against humans even this shorter search is usually enough, and the vastly better positional play makes all the difference against humans, but in direct matches being outsearched by 3 plies or so is a really big deal. So even though you tend to beat Komodo 12 level 17, you might struggle against Dragon Elo 2000. But I would also say that if you can really make a plus score against Komodo 12 level 17, I think you must be stronger than 1900. I recall that level 17 was a pretty good match for average GMs in slow blitz (5' + 2"), and I can't imagine that a 2500 rated GM playing slow blitz would have much trouble beating a 1900 player playing Rapid. Do you have any other ratings you can quote, such as chess.com blitz, Fide, Lichess blitz or Rapid, etc.? I know they are not directly comparable, but I know how to convert from one scale to another reasonably well.

Larrry, I had made a typo, which I edited. I meant Komodo 12 level 14. So Komodo 12 level 14 is beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 by 20+ Elo. I surely can make a solid plus score against it at 15+10 recently. I can even put a decent resistance to it at 5'+5''. My Lichess blitz rating is slightly above 2000, and rapid slightly above 2100.

OK, that makes more sense. Lichess Rapid 2100 is pretty consistent with chess.com Rapid 1900 and also with FIDE 1900, so I guess that's a fair rating for you. In your above paragraph, when you say you make a solid plus score against "it", do you mean Komodo 12 level 14 or Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000? If you are actually beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 in Rapid I am concerned, as I am trying to get the Elo ratings right in Dragon 3, and Dragon 3 as currently planned will be weaker at Elo 2000 than Dragon 2.6 since I was convinced that Dragon 2.6 was too strong at elo settings anywhere near or above 2000. But if you are just projecting that you might beat it based on results vs. Komodo 12 I'm much less concerned, as explained above.

Actually, I have played only two games against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 at 15+10, and I won both. I've played much more against Komodo 12 level 14 and I have a clear plus, but don't know the exact result. I've noticed that Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 made unexpected tactical mistakes, or maybe speculative unsound sacrifices, which Komodo 12 level 14 didn't.

OK, well we did fix one particular type of blunder seen often with Elo settings around 2000 or so in Dragon 2.6 (or 2.6.1), basically blindness to "sham" sacrifices (moves that at first glance look like blunders but actually win material or mate). So while Dragon 3 at Elo 2000 will tend to lose to Dragon 2.6 at same Elo, it won't make such obvious blunders and so may be a better opponent for a human.

Are you planning to release Dragon 3.0 by the 1st week of May, and if so will Komodo 14.1 become Free or the price will be lower to only $19.99 ?

I hope so (by first week of May), but no promise. Probably we should then make Komodo 13 free (one up from current free Komodo 12), and reduce the price of Komodo 14.1, but we haven't discussed these details yet.

That is a great marketing decision since there are Free Chess engine that are of the strength of Komodo 13, which will give some people that never purchased Komodo before a taste of Komodo. There are no engine out there yet that can give odds like Komodo to top human players.

Note: What is the maximum odds that Dragon 3 could give in the future to a Master and an IM at 30 Minutes per game.

Why do you refer to "the future" for Dragon 3 if you expect it to be out in two weeks? Do you just mean "when released"? If so nothing has changed, I doubt that Dragon 3 will be noticeably better at giving piece odds than 2.6 was. 30 minutes per game is just 20% more than 15' + 10" (assuming 60 moves), so Dragon 3 should still be able to give knight odds to a par (2400 FIDE) IM with even results at 30 min. For a borderline master (USCF 2200, about 2140 FIDE or so) knight and move (i.e. Black knight odds) would be about right. If you are asking about the distant future when we might have radically different chess programs, then it's just speculation, maybe rook odds to an IM might be possible in 20 years, who knows?

[lkaufman]

After 1300 and something games, Komodo 12 level 17 has +26 Elo against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000. This is a bit stronger than I predicted. Taking into account that now I am somewhat better than Komodo 12 level 17 at 15+10, and that I am only 1900 at chess.com rapid, there is some confusion. I estimated that Komodo 12 level 17 was about 1800, but it turns out that it's much stronger. There are only two logical answers - either I got qiute stronger than 1900 recently, or Dragon Elo 2000 is overestimated. Somehow I think that the letter is true.

There is a third plausible explanation, which I am inclined to believe. Dragon, using NNUE, is very different from Komodo, using hand-crafted eval. Dragon is dramatically stronger positionally, rarely making strategic/position errors which all HCE engines make. So for Dragon Elo 2000 to play near the level of Komodo 17 level 17 in direct matches, it has to be much weaker tactically (due to a much shorter search depth). Against humans even this shorter search is usually enough, and the vastly better positional play makes all the difference against humans, but in direct matches being outsearched by 3 plies or so is a really big deal. So even though you tend to beat Komodo 12 level 17, you might struggle against Dragon Elo 2000. But I would also say that if you can really make a plus score against Komodo 12 level 17, I think you must be stronger than 1900. I recall that level 17 was a pretty good match for average GMs in slow blitz (5' + 2"), and I can't imagine that a 2500 rated GM playing slow blitz would have much trouble beating a 1900 player playing Rapid. Do you have any other ratings you can quote, such as chess.com blitz, Fide, Lichess blitz or Rapid, etc.? I know they are not directly comparable, but I know how to convert from one scale to another reasonably well.

Larrry, I had made a typo, which I edited. I meant Komodo 12 level 14. So Komodo 12 level 14 is beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 by 20+ Elo. I surely can make a solid plus score against it at 15+10 recently. I can even put a decent resistance to it at 5'+5''. My Lichess blitz rating is slightly above 2000, and rapid slightly above 2100.

OK, that makes more sense. Lichess Rapid 2100 is pretty consistent with chess.com Rapid 1900 and also with FIDE 1900, so I guess that's a fair rating for you. In your above paragraph, when you say you make a solid plus score against "it", do you mean Komodo 12 level 14 or Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000? If you are actually beating Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 in Rapid I am concerned, as I am trying to get the Elo ratings right in Dragon 3, and Dragon 3 as currently planned will be weaker at Elo 2000 than Dragon 2.6 since I was convinced that Dragon 2.6 was too strong at elo settings anywhere near or above 2000. But if you are just projecting that you might beat it based on results vs. Komodo 12 I'm much less concerned, as explained above.

Actually, I have played only two games against Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 at 15+10, and I won both. I've played much more against Komodo 12 level 14 and I have a clear plus, but don't know the exact result. I've noticed that Dragon 2.6 Elo 2000 made unexpected tactical mistakes, or maybe speculative unsound sacrifices, which Komodo 12 level 14 didn't.

OK, well we did fix one particular type of blunder seen often with Elo settings around 2000 or so in Dragon 2.6 (or 2.6.1), basically blindness to "sham" sacrifices (moves that at first glance look like blunders but actually win material or mate). So while Dragon 3 at Elo 2000 will tend to lose to Dragon 2.6 at same Elo, it won't make such obvious blunders and so may be a better opponent for a human.

Are you planning to release Dragon 3.0 by the 1st week of May, and if so will Komodo 14.1 become Free or the price will be lower to only $19.99 ?

I hope so (by first week of May), but no promise. Probably we should then make Komodo 13 free (one up from current free Komodo 12), and reduce the price of Komodo 14.1, but we haven't discussed these details yet.

As far as I am concerned, you don't have to give anything for feee or to lower the price, but I have two appeals:

1. That Dragon 3 is realistic in 2000-2200 Elo range, if possible tested by humans of that class;
2. That Dragon 3 works in the Fritz GUI.

Yes, it has been tested against humans in that range, and I am only around 2200 FIDE level (2315 USCF so maybe about 2250 FIDE is a more realistic figure), so I'll test it myself. It will work properly with the Elo ratings in the Fritz GUI, like 2.6 and not like 2.6.1.

[Marcus9]

I ran a match between Dragon 2.6 1500 elo vs Komodo 12.1.1 Skill 10, after 1000 games whoever had the worst increased his strength, +100 elo for Dragon, +1 level for Komodo, and ran another 1000 games until Komodo 12 lvl 19 is beaten by Dragon. Book used are the first 500 openings of 8moves_v3

dr 1500 vs km 10:
WDL: [156, 529, 315]
Time: 277.91 seconds
elo performance: -55.71 ± 14.76

dr 1600 vs km 10:
WDL: [227, 451, 322]
Time: 294.96 seconds
elo performance: -33.11 ± 15.98

dr 1700 vs km 10:
WDL: [297, 418, 285]
Time: 305.26 seconds
elo performance: 4.17 ± 16.44

dr 1700 vs km 11:
WDL: [169, 418, 413]
Time: 333.98 seconds
elo performance: -86.52 ± 16.57

dr 1800 vs km 11:
WDL: [253, 382, 365]
Time: 343.85 seconds
elo performance: -39.08 ± 16.98

dr 1900 vs km 11:
WDL: [352, 343, 305]
Time: 361.04 seconds
elo performance: 16.34 ± 17.48

dr 1900 vs km 12:
WDL: [261, 334, 405]
Time: 352.78 seconds
elo performance: -50.38 ± 17.68

dr 2000 vs km 12:
WDL: [410, 320, 270]
Time: 388.43 seconds
elo performance: 48.96 ± 17.87

dr 2000 vs km 13:
WDL: [327, 326, 347]
Time: 423.55 seconds
elo performance: -6.95 ± 17.70

dr 2100 vs km 13:
WDL: [458, 283, 259]
Time: 446.74 seconds
elo performance: 70.07 ± 18.47

dr 2100 vs km 14:
WDL: [351, 275, 374]
Time: 510.63 seconds
elo performance: -7.99 ± 18.36

dr 2200 vs km 14:
WDL: [464, 244, 292]
Time: 535.46 seconds
elo performance: 60.36 ± 18.93

dr 2200 vs km 15:
WDL: [385, 260, 355]
Time: 533.94 seconds
elo performance: 10.43 ± 18.55

dr 2200 vs km 16:
WDL: [224, 297, 479]
Time: 571.36 seconds
elo performance: -90.59 ± 18.42

dr 2300 vs km 16:
WDL: [398, 228, 374]
Time: 641.44 seconds
elo performance: 8.34 ± 18.94

dr 2300 vs km 17:
WDL: [235, 262, 503]
Time: 721.49 seconds
elo performance: -95.44 ± 18.96

dr 2400 vs km 17:
WDL: [430, 252, 318]
Time: 841.09 seconds
elo performance: 39.08 ± 18.72

dr 2400 vs km 18:
WDL: [298, 267, 435]
Time: 988.44 seconds
elo performance: -47.90 ± 18.57

dr 2500 vs km 18:
WDL: [474, 256, 270]
Time: 1111.39 seconds
elo performance: 71.89 ± 18.85

dr 2500 vs km 19:
WDL: [271, 274, 455]
Time: 1524.66 seconds
elo performance: -64.66 ± 18.56

dr 2600 vs km 19:
WDL: [493, 285, 222]
Time: 1803.14 seconds
elo performance: 96.57 ± 18.64

Total time: 13311.54

[Fritz 0]

I ran a match between Dragon 2.6 1500 elo vs Komodo 12.1.1 Skill 10, after 1000 games whoever had the worst increased his strength, +100 elo for Dragon, +1 level for Komodo, and ran another 1000 games until Komodo 12 lvl 19 is beaten by Dragon. Book used are the first 500 openings of 8moves_v3

dr 1500 vs km 10:
WDL: [156, 529, 315]
Time: 277.91 seconds
elo performance: -55.71 ± 14.76

dr 1600 vs km 10:
WDL: [227, 451, 322]
Time: 294.96 seconds
elo performance: -33.11 ± 15.98

dr 1700 vs km 10:
WDL: [297, 418, 285]
Time: 305.26 seconds
elo performance: 4.17 ± 16.44

dr 1700 vs km 11:
WDL: [169, 418, 413]
Time: 333.98 seconds
elo performance: -86.52 ± 16.57

dr 1800 vs km 11:
WDL: [253, 382, 365]
Time: 343.85 seconds
elo performance: -39.08 ± 16.98

dr 1900 vs km 11:
WDL: [352, 343, 305]
Time: 361.04 seconds
elo performance: 16.34 ± 17.48

dr 1900 vs km 12:
WDL: [261, 334, 405]
Time: 352.78 seconds
elo performance: -50.38 ± 17.68

dr 2000 vs km 12:
WDL: [410, 320, 270]
Time: 388.43 seconds
elo performance: 48.96 ± 17.87

dr 2000 vs km 13:
WDL: [327, 326, 347]
Time: 423.55 seconds
elo performance: -6.95 ± 17.70

dr 2100 vs km 13:
WDL: [458, 283, 259]
Time: 446.74 seconds
elo performance: 70.07 ± 18.47

dr 2100 vs km 14:
WDL: [351, 275, 374]
Time: 510.63 seconds
elo performance: -7.99 ± 18.36

dr 2200 vs km 14:
WDL: [464, 244, 292]
Time: 535.46 seconds
elo performance: 60.36 ± 18.93

dr 2200 vs km 15:
WDL: [385, 260, 355]
Time: 533.94 seconds
elo performance: 10.43 ± 18.55

dr 2200 vs km 16:
WDL: [224, 297, 479]
Time: 571.36 seconds
elo performance: -90.59 ± 18.42

dr 2300 vs km 16:
WDL: [398, 228, 374]
Time: 641.44 seconds
elo performance: 8.34 ± 18.94

dr 2300 vs km 17:
WDL: [235, 262, 503]
Time: 721.49 seconds
elo performance: -95.44 ± 18.96

dr 2400 vs km 17:
WDL: [430, 252, 318]
Time: 841.09 seconds
elo performance: 39.08 ± 18.72

dr 2400 vs km 18:
WDL: [298, 267, 435]
Time: 988.44 seconds
elo performance: -47.90 ± 18.57

dr 2500 vs km 18:
WDL: [474, 256, 270]
Time: 1111.39 seconds
elo performance: 71.89 ± 18.85

dr 2500 vs km 19:
WDL: [271, 274, 455]
Time: 1524.66 seconds
elo performance: -64.66 ± 18.56

dr 2600 vs km 19:
WDL: [493, 285, 222]
Time: 1803.14 seconds
elo performance: 96.57 ± 18.64

Total time: 13311.54

dr 2300 vs km 16:
WDL: [398, 228, 374]
Time: 641.44 seconds
elo performance: 8.34 ± 18.94

This test is especially interesting to me. In the last couple of days, I tried my luck against different versions of Komodo at 7 ply search. I played against Komodo 13.02 level 16, Komodo 14.1 level 20 and Komodo 12.1.1 level 16, all at 15+10 time control. My results are:

3-3 vs. Komodo 13.02 level 16 (2 wins, 2 losses, 2 draws)
1-2 vs. Komodo 14.1 level 20 (1 win, 2 losses)
1-3 vs. Komodo 12.1.1 level 16 (1 win, 3 losses)

It seems that I can put a solid resistance to Komodos at 7 ply. I estimate that they are about 2200 Elo at rapid 15+10, maybe a bit less. 5 out of 13 is 38,5%, that is, -81 ELo. So my performance in these 13 games is at least 2100 Elo.

[Marcus9]

I ran a match between Dragon 2.6 1500 elo vs Komodo 12.1.1 Skill 10, after 1000 games whoever had the worst increased his strength, +100 elo for Dragon, +1 level for Komodo, and ran another 1000 games until Komodo 12 lvl 19 is beaten by Dragon. Book used are the first 500 openings of 8moves_v3

dr 1500 vs km 10:
WDL: [156, 529, 315]
Time: 277.91 seconds
elo performance: -55.71 ± 14.76

dr 1600 vs km 10:
WDL: [227, 451, 322]
Time: 294.96 seconds
elo performance: -33.11 ± 15.98

dr 1700 vs km 10:
WDL: [297, 418, 285]
Time: 305.26 seconds
elo performance: 4.17 ± 16.44

dr 1700 vs km 11:
WDL: [169, 418, 413]
Time: 333.98 seconds
elo performance: -86.52 ± 16.57

dr 1800 vs km 11:
WDL: [253, 382, 365]
Time: 343.85 seconds
elo performance: -39.08 ± 16.98

dr 1900 vs km 11:
WDL: [352, 343, 305]
Time: 361.04 seconds
elo performance: 16.34 ± 17.48

dr 1900 vs km 12:
WDL: [261, 334, 405]
Time: 352.78 seconds
elo performance: -50.38 ± 17.68

dr 2000 vs km 12:
WDL: [410, 320, 270]
Time: 388.43 seconds
elo performance: 48.96 ± 17.87

dr 2000 vs km 13:
WDL: [327, 326, 347]
Time: 423.55 seconds
elo performance: -6.95 ± 17.70

dr 2100 vs km 13:
WDL: [458, 283, 259]
Time: 446.74 seconds
elo performance: 70.07 ± 18.47

dr 2100 vs km 14:
WDL: [351, 275, 374]
Time: 510.63 seconds
elo performance: -7.99 ± 18.36

dr 2200 vs km 14:
WDL: [464, 244, 292]
Time: 535.46 seconds
elo performance: 60.36 ± 18.93

dr 2200 vs km 15:
WDL: [385, 260, 355]
Time: 533.94 seconds
elo performance: 10.43 ± 18.55

dr 2200 vs km 16:
WDL: [224, 297, 479]
Time: 571.36 seconds
elo performance: -90.59 ± 18.42

dr 2300 vs km 16:
WDL: [398, 228, 374]
Time: 641.44 seconds
elo performance: 8.34 ± 18.94

dr 2300 vs km 17:
WDL: [235, 262, 503]
Time: 721.49 seconds
elo performance: -95.44 ± 18.96

dr 2400 vs km 17:
WDL: [430, 252, 318]
Time: 841.09 seconds
elo performance: 39.08 ± 18.72

dr 2400 vs km 18:
WDL: [298, 267, 435]
Time: 988.44 seconds
elo performance: -47.90 ± 18.57

dr 2500 vs km 18:
WDL: [474, 256, 270]
Time: 1111.39 seconds
elo performance: 71.89 ± 18.85

dr 2500 vs km 19:
WDL: [271, 274, 455]
Time: 1524.66 seconds
elo performance: -64.66 ± 18.56

dr 2600 vs km 19:
WDL: [493, 285, 222]
Time: 1803.14 seconds
elo performance: 96.57 ± 18.64

Total time: 13311.54

dr 2300 vs km 16:
WDL: [398, 228, 374]
Time: 641.44 seconds
elo performance: 8.34 ± 18.94

This test is especially interesting to me. In the last couple of days, I tried my luck against different versions of Komodo at 7 ply search. I played against Komodo 13.02 level 16, Komodo 14.1 level 20 and Komodo 12.1.1 level 16, all at 15+10 time control. My results are:

3-3 vs. Komodo 13.02 level 16 (2 wins, 2 losses, 2 draws)
1-2 vs. Komodo 14.1 level 20 (1 win, 2 losses)
1-3 vs. Komodo 12.1.1 level 16 (1 win, 3 losses)

It seems that I can put a solid resistance to Komodos at 7 ply. I estimate that they are about 2200 Elo at rapid 15+10, maybe a bit less. 5 out of 13 is 38,5%, that is, -81 ELo. So my performance in these 13 games is at least 2100 Elo.

Komodo 13 level 16? Are you sure? Komodo's 13 levels should be similar to Komodo 14 right?

[Fritz 0]

Yes, Komodo 13.02 level 16. It has 20 levels, level 19 being 10 ply, so level 16 is 7 ply. Komodo 14.1 has 25 levels, level 23 being 10 ply, so level 20 is 7 ply.

[Marcus9]

Yes, Komodo 13.02 level 16. It has 20 levels, level 19 being 10 ply, so level 16 is 7 ply. Komodo 14.1 has 25 levels, level 23 being 10 ply, so level 20 is 7 ply.

Sorry, i remembered wrong, maybe the new levels have been inserted in a later version of komodo 13