CCRL 40/15, 40/2 and FRC lists updated (13th February 2021)

[Graham Banks]

The latest CCRL Rating Lists and Statistics are available for viewing from the following links:
http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/4040 (40/15)
http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404 (40/2)
http://ccrl.chessdom.com/ccrl/404FRC (FRC 40/2)

Please note that the three lists are often updated separately to each other. The FRC list is only updated when a new engine or engine version is being/has been tested.

The links to the various rating lists can be found just beneath the default Best Versions list (as in this screenshot). Specific 32-bit rating lists are denoted as such to the right of the default list in each category. The default lists contain the 64-bit engines.



Our 40 moves in 15 minutes repeating and 40 moves in 2 minutes repeating are both adjusted to the Intel i7 4770k (3.5GHz) using the Stockfish 10 64-bit benchmark.

Be aware that in the early stages of testing, an engine's rating can often fluctuate a lot.
It is strongly advised to look at the many other rating lists available in order to get a more accurate overall picture of an engine's rating relative to others.

The inclusion or exclusion of engines in our lists should not be taken as our group making a statement about their legality or status. Where there is controversy, it is usually mentioned in the engine notes.

Thanks to all of our currently active testers (Graham, Ray, Gabor, Sergio and Volodymyr). Thanks also to Chessdom.com for hosting our website.

40/15 testing this week that I'm aware of will include (with live broadcast port for TLCV noted where applicable):

The Return Of Icarus Tournament (finishing Thursday 16053)
New Tournament (starting Thursday 16053)
84th Amateur Series Division 4 (continuing 16002)
84th Amateur Series Division 5 (continuing 16001)
Wasp 4.50 64-bit Gauntlet (starting today 16063)
Marvin 5.0.0 64-bit Gauntlet (finishing Wednesday 16064)
Arasan 22.2 64-bit Gauntlet (finishing Wednesday 16065)
Francesca MAD 0.30a 64-bit Gauntlet (starting Wednesday 16066)
Rubichess 2.0 64-bit Gauntlet (continuing 16091)
Pedone 3.0 64-bit Gauntlet (continuing 16092)
Nemorino 6.05 64-bit Gauntlet (continuing 16093)
Fat Fritz 2 64-bit Gauntlet (continuing 16094)
Slowchess Blitz Classic 2.5 64-bit 4CPU Gauntlet (continuing 16083)
RubiChess 2.0 64-bit 4CPU Gauntlet (starting today 16084)

40/2 testing since the last update report has included (thanks to Gabor and Sergio):

RubiChess 2.0 64-bit
Waxman 2020
Stash 27.0 64-bit
Drofa 2.2.0 64-bit
Dumb 1.8 64-bit
Fat Fritz 2 64-bit
Cosette 4.0 64-bit
Fat Fritz 2 64-bit 8CPU

FRC 40/2 testing since the last update report has included (thanks to Ray):

Dumb 1.8 64-bit
RubiChess 2.0 64-bit

[Graham Banks]

I realize that there are some engine authors and others who are unhappy with our classification of Fat Fritz 2, just as some were previously unhappy with the inclusion of Rybka and Houdini, etc, etc.

Basically, we're damned either way.

We're just a small group of people who enjoy testing engines, pooling our efforts to maintain rating lists.
I strongly believe that most engine authors appreciate what we do, and it encourages them to improve further.

You can disagree with us, or be angry with us, but please try to see it from our point of view and understand that we try to remain neutral as much as possible.

Sometimes, you don't appreciate something until it's gone.

[Ozymandias]

Basically, we're damned either way.

Code: Select all

The hottest places in Hell are reserved for those
who, in times of moral crisis, preserved their neutrality.
                    -Dante Alighieri-


                                                  /)_(\
                                           ______( 0 0 )______
                                          /_/_/_/\` ' `/\_\_\_\
                                                  )'_'(
                                             ____.""_"".____
                                            |___|___|___|___|
                                              |___|___|___|
         Damn! why am I always                  |-      |
  the last one to hear about these things...    |       |
                        /                      _|_______|_
                    ___                       |___|___|___|
                   /   \                        |'   | ||
                   )'__/                        |       |
                   \(\\                         |       |
                     _\\__                      |       |
                    /,_ \--\                    |     - |
               ____// \ |   \                   |       |
              /,-' `  _)/   |\_                 |       |
              ``     ,o_:)  ```                 |       |
         .          /    \        .             |       |
                   /      \                     | |     |
      .    (      c        c     )    .         |       |
       (    )      \      /     (    )          |       |
      ( )  '        |     |      '  ( )        _|_______|_
      _#, .    ...,:o    o:,..    . ,#_ ,, ,,,|___b'ger___|,,,

[mar]

Well they literally changed a single constant in the whole engine, so marketing drivel aside I don't see why it's not listed as one of the SF-based engines.
This creates a dangerous precedens and encourages cheap cloning (I don't consider machine time as genuine "work"). A lot of people were working hard on SF in the past 17 years (this timespan includes Glaurung).

Not to mention that Houdini 6, which has been exposed as a fraud recently is not listed as part of SF family either (a removal would be better as it only pollutes rating lists).

People love to praise false idols, I get that. But chessprogrammers usually know who is who.

Of course, it's your list and you're free to do as you see fit, but then don't be surprised if some people won't take you seriously anymore.
Perhaps Andrew was right and computer chess is dead indeed.

[Modern Times]

Of course, it's your list and you're free to do as you see fit, but then don't be surprised if some people won't take you seriously anymore.

No surprise, you can't please everyone all of the time.

As Graham says, we have to take a view on things. If anyone is unhappy, they are not forced to look at our lists. We are just one of many.

[Rebel]

Well they literally changed a single constant in the whole engine, so marketing drivel aside I don't see why it's not listed as one of the SF-based engines.
This creates a dangerous precedens and encourages cheap cloning (I don't consider machine time as genuine "work"). A lot of people were working hard on SF in the past 17 years (this timespan includes Glaurung).

Not to mention that Houdini 6, which has been exposed as a fraud recently is not listed as part of SF family either (a removal would be better as it only pollutes rating lists).

People love to praise false idols, I get that. But chessprogrammers usually know who is who.

Of course, it's your list and you're free to do as you see fit, but then don't be surprised if some people won't take you seriously anymore.
Perhaps Andrew was right and computer chess is dead indeed.

+1

[connor_mcmonigle]

Well they literally changed a single constant in the whole engine, so marketing drivel aside I don't see why it's not listed as one of the SF-based engines.
This creates a dangerous precedens and encourages cheap cloning (I don't consider machine time as genuine "work"). A lot of people were working hard on SF in the past 17 years (this timespan includes Glaurung).

Not to mention that Houdini 6, which has been exposed as a fraud recently is not listed as part of SF family either (a removal would be better as it only pollutes rating lists).

People love to praise false idols, I get that. But chessprogrammers usually know who is who.

Of course, it's your list and you're free to do as you see fit, but then don't be surprised if some people won't take you seriously anymore.
Perhaps Andrew was right and computer chess is dead indeed.

+2

No surprise, you can't please everyone all of the time.

As Graham says, we have to take a view on things. If anyone is unhappy, they are not forced to look at our lists. We are just one of many.

Sure. However, it is possible to avoid displeasing nearly everyone in this situation. Literally every engine author I've discussed this with has ranged from ambivalent to angered by CCRL's decision to list cheap clones as unique engines. Polluting the rating lists with a large number of clones undermines CCRL's purpose: to provide clear information about the ratings of engines.

Were FF2, SugAR, ShashChess, Houdini, Fire, etc. to be listed as versions of SF (because that's what they are), the only group that I'm aware of that I believe would be displeased by this change is ChessBase's marketing team...

I very much appreciate the services CCRL provides. However, I believe CCRL would better serve the community by correctly listing engines.

[Rebel]

Of course, it's your list and you're free to do as you see fit, but then don't be surprised if some people won't take you seriously anymore.

No surprise, you can't please everyone all of the time.

I think you can.

Like in earlier times, list derivatives in grey.

FF2 is 99.9% SF and only a different net, something varying between a clone and a derivative, grey those, like Fire, Houdini, Slashchess, Sugar etc.

[Graham Banks]

I'm thinking that CEGT have done it right, so I'll suggest that to the other testers.