Is Rybka really that Great ?

[pichy]

If we take a look at the recent match Joel vs Rybka with a pawn Odd, and take a look at GM Benjamin rating which is no more than 2670 and wonder why he got 3.5 point out of 8 games 3.5 to 4.5, Now If instead of Rybka, Anand was playing versus Joel Benjamin with a Pawn Odd the result would have been less than 2.5 out of 8 games or 2.5 to 5.5. Now Why are computer less effective with pawn Odd playing versus human GM when the difference in rating is more than 200 rating points

[Michael Sherwin]

Joel was awarded a win in one game, because of a programming bug in Rybk. So the match may have been 2.5 to 5.5. Concidering that Joel had an extra pawn in every game then this is a dismal score. If Joel would recieve the same pawn odds against Anand, Joel would win the match against Anand by about 6.0 to 2.0 and that is allowing room for some luck on Anand's part. I am sure that Joel would play like a strong human grandmaster against Anand and not like some beginner, making first moves like Na3.

If anyone by now does not understand just how far Rybka towers above even the strongest human player, then they never will.

[George Tsavdaris]

If we take a look at the recent match Joel vs Rybka with a pawn Odd, and take a look at GM Benjamin rating which is no more than 2670 and wonder why he got 3.5 point out of 8 games 3.5 to 4.5, Now If instead of Rybka, Anand was playing versus Joel Benjamin with a Pawn Odd the result would have been less than 2.5 out of 8 games or 2.5 to 5.5.

First Joel Benjamin is rated 2576 FIDE ELO.

Second he got a score of 3.5 - 4.5, but this is not the real score that indicates the strength difference between him and Rybka in Pawn-odds of a to h Pawn, since he got a "free" win in first game. We have to ignore that single game, for comparing Rybka and Joel performance.

Third, the statement that Joel would get less or equal to 2.5 out of 8 games against Anand, is just an unfounded assumption. You just can't know about it.


So we can't really know about the validity of your following conclusion:

Now Why are computer less effective with pawn Odd playing versus human GM when the difference in rating is more than 200 rating points

[Tord Romstad]

I am sure that Joel would play like a strong human grandmaster against Anand and not like some beginner, making first moves like Na3.

Actually, Joel didn't make first moves like Na3. The reason why you see the move 1. Na3 in game 2 is that whoever prepared the PGN files didn't know about the FEN tag. Therefore all the PGN games start from the standard opening positions, and begin with some nonsense moves which removes the desired pawn from the board. The PGN in game 2 begins with the following moves:

1.Na3 c5 2.Nf3 c4 3.Nxc4 Nh6 4.Na3 Ng4 5.Ng1 Nf6 6.Nb1 Ng8

I agree with the rest of your points.

Tord

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I also share Michael's opinion

[Dr.Ex]

Joel was awarded a win in one game, because of a programming bug in Rybk. So the match may have been 2.5 to 5.5. Concidering that Joel had an extra pawn in every game then this is a dismal score. If Joel would recieve the same pawn odds against Anand, Joel would win the match against Anand by about 6.0 to 2.0 and that is allowing room for some luck on Anand's part.

Not in such a miserable form.

If anyone by now does not understand just how far Rybka towers above even the strongest human player, then they never will.

OK, so I never will.
Joel had total winning positions several times in the match.
Rybka didn't even play very well. It could have played much better several times.

[Graham Banks]

I am sure that Joel would play like a strong human grandmaster against Anand and not like some beginner, making first moves like Na3.

Actually, Joel didn't make first moves like Na3. The reason why you see the move 1. Na3 in game 2 is that whoever prepared the PGN files didn't know about the FEN tag. Therefore all the PGN games start from the standard opening positions, and begin with some nonsense moves which removes the desired pawn from the board. The PGN in game 2 begins with the following moves:

1.Na3 c5 2.Nf3 c4 3.Nxc4 Nh6 4.Na3 Ng4 5.Ng1 Nf6 6.Nb1 Ng8

Tord

Yes - this is what many are missing.
The first few moves of each game were pre-made in the GUI to allow Rybka to start from an initial setup position with the particular pawn being removed.

[Dr.Ex]

A Grandmaster should be able to win this positions against God, provided God doesn't cheat:

[d]r5k1/pppbq2p/2n1p1pb/4P3/5r2/2PB1NQ1/PP1N1PPP/3RR1K1 b

[d]r1b1r1k1/1pp1b2p/2nqp1pB/3n1p2/3P4/2PB1NN1/PP1Q1PPP/R3R1K1 b

[d]1k1rr3/pbpq1pp1/1pn5/2Pp4/3P4/3QPNPP/P4PB1/1RR3K1 w

You have to admit though that Benjamin only had one hour plus increment for the game. I guess he would have won the corresponding games with more time.

[George Tsavdaris]

A Grandmaster should be able to win this positions against God, provided God doesn't cheat:

I don't agree that the situation is so easy as you describe.
A GM has enough chances to win these positions against a perfect player, but it is not easy to do it.
To do it Benjamin had to open the positions most times and opening the position against a computer is not the most desirable thing a 2576 GM would want.

In my opinion Benjamin has shown an intention that he didn't want to win a game and a draw it was enough to him.
Or maybe he wanted to win the games, but he was not willing to take even small risks....

[Michael Sherwin]

I am sure that Joel would play like a strong human grandmaster against Anand and not like some beginner, making first moves like Na3.

Actually, Joel didn't make first moves like Na3. The reason why you see the move 1. Na3 in game 2 is that whoever prepared the PGN files didn't know about the FEN tag. Therefore all the PGN games start from the standard opening positions, and begin with some nonsense moves which removes the desired pawn from the board. The PGN in game 2 begins with the following moves:

1.Na3 c5 2.Nf3 c4 3.Nxc4 Nh6 4.Na3 Ng4 5.Ng1 Nf6 6.Nb1 Ng8

I agree with the rest of your points.

Tord

I assumed that the pawn was already removed. If I would have actually played over the games then I would have been able to figure it out. Now that I understand that Na3 was not part of the game then I am more inclined to play over them.