My test for Stockfish_22011019_x64_bmi2

[Eduard]

The problem with the book tests is this. Small books are no worse than large books. The big books have many more variants and go deeper.

That has a special effect. It's about the time! Engine X with a small book has to calculate itself earlier. Consequently, with the same playing strength, engine X will make more mistakes than engine Y, which plays with more book moves. With less time, the engine calculates less deeply.

Ultimately, these book tests say little.

I could always make a strong book up to 100 moves deep, but why?

This would be harmful on the server because so-called bots save all the games there. If I play with deep books then everything is quickly copied. That's why I prefer to play with small books, where I always implement new moves by hand. So I'm harder to calculate. Some of my friends play with short books on its 64 cores. If you have a lot of cores, you should play with small books. For online tournament games I prefer small book.

[mehmet123]

In this test, Kayra 1.1 outperformed Stockfish by +28 elo. But since the opening books are different and Stockfish uses a book from 2010, it would not be correct to attribute this success to Kayra 1.1 chess engine. If the pgn of the games are published, we will reach a clearer result if we evaluate the position at the end of the opening books moves with a 3rd engine like Dragon 2.6.