Collector's Corner..2007 Annual Physicals ..Continue..

[Robert Weck]

Hi Steve,


Thank you for this nice games! How easily the Excellence is giving away an exchange in both games!

But the result should be 1-0, correct?

[Round "1"]
[White "Fidelity Excellence 4.0"]
[Black "Excalibur Black Mirage"]
[TimeControl "30 sec/Avg."]
[Result "0-1*"]


best regards,
Robert

[Steve B]

Hi Steve,


Thank you for this nice games! How easily the Excellence is giving away an exchange in both games!

But the result should be 1-0, correct?

[Round "1"]
[White "Fidelity Excellence 4.0"]
[Black "Excalibur Black Mirage"]
[TimeControl "30 sec/Avg."]
[Result "0-1*"]


best regards,
Robert

YES Robert
A TYPO on my part!!
thanks for catching it!

Proof Reading Regards
Steve

[Steve B]

One Crucial Aspect of testing the old computers in ones collection of course is the arrival of a ..new.. old ..chess computer
a new arrival MUST be quickly and thoroughly tested in order to consummate the final transaction and to allow the lawyers to begin lengthy and costly legal action if an unknown defect is found

recently i acquired the CXG Sphinx Galaxy and so it needed testing without delay
the Galaxy is a very interesting collectors item for several reasons

firstly.. there seems to be some confusion amongst collectors mixing up the name of this computer with the Sphinx Commander
the two computers are not the same..
the Commander is a wooden computer while the Galaxy is plastic
this is the only model CXG EVER released with the name "Galaxy":

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/cpaa2@sbcgl ... 1050266/46

secondly..the Galaxy is the same EXACT computer as the Sphinx Dominator(Plastic)
indeed the manuals are exactly the same and even the version number of the program in my Dominator and Galaxy are identical at 2.04
all features and functions are also the exact same
this is a bit odd because generally if a company is going to release the same program in different models they will release one as a less expensive plastic model and then another in a more expensive wooden version
here we have two different plastic models with the same program

even as we speak there is a Mint Dominator on Ebay:

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?Vi ... &rd=1&rd=1

The Galaxy/Dominator were programmed by Frans Morsch(Of Fritz Fame) and were rated 1870 Elo (SS).
they are the second strongest chess computers CXG ever released for sale(the Sphinx 40/50 running on the 68000 processor should be rated a bit higher but i have never seen a published rating anywhere for them)

The Mephsito Rebel 5.0(1826 Elo-SS) was due for its annual physical and since the two computers are close in rating ,I played a game between them
The Rebel 5.0 is of course well known as it is the VERY FIRST dedicated chess computer to contain a program by the legendary programmer( and member here ) Ed Schröder:

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/cpaa2@sbcgl ... 6788365/17


In the game.. the lower rated Rebel 5.0 had the White pieces and the time control was 30 Sec Per Move/Avg.
the Rebel was out of book first at move 2!...

typical middle game search depths were 5 for both the Rebel and the Galaxy and 7 in the endgame



[White "Mephisto Rebel 5.0"]
[Black "CXG Sphinx Galaxy"]
[TimeControl "30sec/avg"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]

1.c4 Nc6 2.d4 d5 3.cxd5 Qxd5 4.Nf3 e5 5.dxe5 Qxd1+ 6.Kxd1 Be6 7.Bg5 h6
8.Bh4 Be7 9.Bg3 O-O-O+ 10.Kc1

[d] 2kr2nr/ppp1bpp1/2n1b2p/4P3/8/5NB1/PP2PPPP/RNK2B1R b - - 0 10
oddly enough the Galaxy had been playing from its book through 6..Be6 while the Rebel was out of book at move 2.
and yet we have the Rebel up a pawn which it holds on to for the duration of the game


10..h5 11.e4 h4 12.Bf4 h3 13.gxh3 Bxh3 14.Nbd2
Be6 15.Ng5 Nd4 16.Nxe6 Nxe6 17.Be3 Bc5 18.Bxc5 Nxc5 19.Kc2 Ne6 20.Bc4
Ne7 21.Rad1 Ng6 22.Nf3 Ngf4 23.h4 Rhe8 24.Rhg1 g6 25.Rgf1 Kb8 26.Ng5 Rd4
27.b3 Rf8 28.Nxe6 Nxe6 29.Bxe6 Rxd1 30.Kxd1 fxe6

[d] 1k3r2/ppp5/4p1p1/4P3/4P2P/1P6/P4P2/3K1R2 w - - 0 31
both computers rate the position about the same with the Rebel's PV showing +1.19 and the Galaxy showing -1.25

at this point in the game both computers started to access their Nabilov endgame table bases(or is it the Tabilov Naval bases?) so the ensuing R+P endgame play
is flawless for both sides

31.Rg1 Rxf2 32.Rxg6 Kc8
33.Rxe6 Rxa2 34.Re8+ Kd7 35.Rb8 Ke6 36.Rxb7 Kxe5 37.Rxc7 Kxe4 38.h5 Rh2
39.Rc5 Kf3 40.Rg5 Kf4 41.Ra5 Ke3 42.Rf5 Kd3 43.Rf3+ Kd4 44.Rf7 a6 45.Rf6
Rxh5 46.Rxa6 Kc3 47.Rb6 Rh1+ 48.Ke2 Rb1 49.Rc6+ Kxb3 *..1/2-1/2

FINAL POSITION
[d] 8/8/2R5/8/8/1k6/4K3/1r6 w - - 0 50

A nice clean game for both computers
The Lawyers Will Have To Wait For Another Day Regards
Steve

[Steve B]

Seeing how easily the Mephisto Rebel 5.0 drew against the higher rated Sphinx Galaxy i was curious to see how it would do against even stiffer competition

this time i loaded up the Renaissance board with the D8 program rated about 1900
Selective search shows a 1923 for the D10 so i figure 1900 for the D8
I gave the Rebel the White pieces again as it is rated a good 100 elo lower then the D8
same time control...30 Sec/Avg. Per Move




[White "Mephisto Rebel 5.0"]
[Black "Saitek D8++"]
[TimeControl "30Sec/Avg]
[Result "1-0"]

1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 e6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nc6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Be2 d5 7.exd5 exd5
8.O-O Bb4 9.Nxc6 bxc6 10.Qd4 Bxc3 11.Qxc3 Qf6 12.Bd2 Qxc3 13.Bxc3 Nf6
14.Bxf6 gxf6 15.Rae1 Kd8 16.Bd3 Rb8

[d] 1rbk3r/5p1p/p1p2p2/3p4/8/3B4/PPP2PPP/4RRK1 w - - 0 17

it is in a position such as this that Schröder's Rebel program shines its brightest
never known to be a tactical wizard the early Rebel program did distinguish itself in subtle positional play
a quick glance at the position shows material equality but an extremely poor pawn structure for the D8
four separate pawn islands with one set of doubled pawns
the next moves show that the Rebel understands the position better then the D8 which just seems to be playing aimlessly


17.b3 h6 18.f4 Rg8 19.Kf2 a5 20.a4
Rb4 21.g3 Be6 22.f5 Bd7 23.Rd1 c5 24.Be2 d4 25.Bd3 Rg5 26.h4 Rg8 27.Rfe1
Bc6 28.Ra1 Rg4 29.Rac1 Kd7 30.Bc4 Rg7 31.c3 dxc3 32.Rxc3 Rb7 33.Rd3+ Kc7
34.Rdd1 Ra7 35.Re7+ Kb6 36.Rxa7 Kxa7 37.Rd6 Kb7 38.Rxf6 Bd7 39.Bxf7 Kc7
40.Be6 h5 41.Rh6 Bxe6 42.fxe6 Kd6 43.Rxh5 Rb7 44.e7 Rxe7 45.Rh6+ Kd5
46.Rb6 Rf7+ 47.Kg2 Kd4 48.g4


[d] 8/5r2/1R6/p1p5/P2k2PP/1P6/6K1/8 b - - 0 48

A clear win for Rebel
from here it just walks both King Side pawns up ..side by side for an easy win



48..Kc3 49.h5 Rc7 50.g5 c4 51.bxc4 Rxc4 52.g6
Rxa4 53.h6 Rd4 54.h7 Rd2+ 55.Kf3 Rd3+ 56.Ke4 Rd4+ 57.Ke5 Rh4 58.g7 Rh5+
59.Kf4 Rh4+ 60.Kg5 Rxh7 61.g8=Q Ra7 62.Qd5 Rg7+ 63.Kf6 Rg4 64.Rb3+ Kc2
65.Qd3+ Kc1 66.Rb1# 1-0

FINAL POSITION

[d]8/8/5K2/p7/6r1/3Q4/8/1Rk5 b - - 0 66

Sweet Game For the Rebel 5.0

Rebel WITH A Cause Regards
Steve

[Robert Weck]

Hi Steve,

recently i acquired the CXG Sphinx Galaxy and so it needed testing without delay
the Galaxy is a very interesting collectors item for several reasons

congrats on that Galaxy (nearly a Commander; just the wood is missing! )

http://new.photos.yahoo.com/cpaa2@sbcgl ... 1050266/46

secondly..the Galaxy is the same EXACT computer as the Sphinx Dominator(Plastic)

and so is the Commander!

here we have two different plastic models with the same program

The Galaxy/Dominator were programmed by Frans Morsch(Of Fritz Fame) and were rated 1870 Elo (SS).
they are the second strongest chess computers CXG ever released for sale(the Sphinx 40/50 running on the 68000 processor should be rated a bit higher but i have never seen a published rating anywhere for them)

sorry, but i have to disagree here: the Sphinx 40/50 is clearly weaker (i would estimate it at not more than 1700 SSDF-ELO)

Just look at its Erlenbach '07 result:

http://www.schach-computer.info/Partien ... g_2007.htm (which nearly corresponded to my expectations)


Galaxy/Dominator/Commander are the best CXGs regards,
Robert

[Steve B]

Hi Robert,

congrats on that Galaxy (nearly a Commander; just the wood is missing! )

thats it Robert..Rub it in deep

sorry, but i have to disagree here: the Sphinx 40/50 is clearly weaker (i would estimate it at not more than 1700 SSDF-ELO)

Just look at its Erlenbach '07 result:

http://www.schach-computer.info/Partien ... g_2007.htm (which nearly corresponded to my expectations)

in Kurts collection he estimates the Sphinx 40 as a 20 Elo higher then the Dominator:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/schachc1.htm

i think he is probably correct


the problem of course with establishing a rating based upon one small tournament is the very low number of games .so we cannot say for certain that the Sphinx40/50 is truely so weak

when you guys at .info can post perhaps 1000 or so games for the 40/50 then we can talk again


Until then...

Sphinx 40-50 Rulez Regards
Steve

[Robert Weck]

Hi Steve,

in Kurts collection he estimates the Sphinx 40 as a 20 Elo higher then the Dominator:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/schachc1.htm

i think he is probably correct

I think, he simply forgot to update his website for this:
just look at his comment to the Sphinx 40:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sphinx40.htm

he says, that the playing strength was not convincing and it lost 0-3 against the Dominator

the problem of course with establishing a rating based upon one small tournament is the very low number of games .so we cannot say for certain that the Sphinx40/50 is truely so weak

when you guys at .info can post perhaps 1000 or so games for the 40/50 then we can talk again

ouch, that's hard!

you don't think, that

0,5-3,5 against Super Constellation,
5-7 against Constellation 2.0
and
3-6 against Turbostar 432

could be enough... ?


not good for a 1900-ELO computer regards,
Robert

[Steve B]

Hi Steve,

in Kurts collection he estimates the Sphinx 40 as a 20 Elo higher then the Dominator:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/schachc1.htm

i think he is probably correct

I think, he simply forgot to update his website for this:
just look at his comment to the Sphinx 40:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sphinx40.htm

he says, that the playing strength was not convincing and it lost 0-3 against the Dominator

the problem of course with establishing a rating based upon one small tournament is the very low number of games .so we cannot say for certain that the Sphinx40/50 is truly so weak

when you guys at .info can post perhaps 1000 or so games for the 40/50 then we can talk again

ouch, that's hard!

you don't think, that

0,5-3,5 against Super Constellation,
5-7 against Constellation 2.0
and
3-6 against Turbostar 432

could be enough... ?


not good for a 1900-ELO computer regards,
Robert

there is a danger to rate one computer by playing it against another computer from the same company

even if the programmers are different

so 0-3 vs the Dominator is very tricky to come to a conclusion
it is much more accurate to play against other computers from different companies and even then many games

in this thread you see the Rebel defeating computers more then 100 elo stronger at 30 sec per move
it would be foolish for me to think that the Rebel is really that much stronger even if it were to win 10 more games

nay..we need many many games for an accurate rating


as far as Kurt forgetting to update his site..well ..i remember having a discussion with him perhaps 4-5 years ago about the rating for the Sphinx 40 because i could not find one anywhere and i still can not find one today for it
back then he seemed fairly certain his listing was correct and he did not want to change it and he already had the same comments about the games against Dominator already posted

Kurt NEVER Forgets Regards
Steve

[Robert Weck]

there is a danger to rate one computer by playing it against another computer from the same company

even if the programmers are different

so 0-3 vs the Dominator is very tricky to come to a conclusion
it is much more accurate to play against other computers from different companies and even then many games

of course that's true (as every engine-fan will confirm)
but we have games against 3 programmers here: Morsch, Kittinger and Kaplan.

and these results (together with Erlenbach '07) show at least a trend

reminds me at our discussions about Citrine's strength!


I'm afraid, we won't convince each other regards,
Robert

[Steve B]

there is a danger to rate one computer by playing it against another computer from the same company

even if the programmers are different

so 0-3 vs the Dominator is very tricky to come to a conclusion
it is much more accurate to play against other computers from different companies and even then many games

of course that's true (as every engine-fan will confirm)
but we have games against 3 programmers here: Morsch, Kittinger and Kaplan.

and these results (together with Erlenbach '07) show at least a trend

reminds me at our discussions about Citrine's strength!


I'm afraid, we won't convince each other regards,
Robert

yes
as usual we can agree... to disagree

Debating Regards
Steve