|
|
Home Information Login Register Waiting lists Membership Hall of fame Tournaments Best game Wikichess Rating list Problems Forum Links Help About
Hot news Discussions Files search Social network
|
Back to forum Thibault de Vassal (2006-10-21 12:11:22) Tactics / server chess You just have to be a bit more creative or to play different openings in your 3 games as White & Black in a tournament... Anyway, with online databases it's quite easy to know any player style & opening book. There are many psychological tactics with server chess & CC time controls IMO, ie. it may be quite important to manage your unlucky opponent spirit during a tournament :) Marc Lacrosse (2006-11-24 09:27:56) completely unfair and thus impredictible The fact that the match conditions have been arranged on such unfair rules has two immediate consequences : - we already know for sure that Kramnik himself is sure that he could not succeed on a more fair ground - final result is unpredictible and probably already arranged beforehand Marc By the way the rules are really incredible. Just an example : not only does Kramnik have the final opening book of Fritz at home for preparation, but moreover he will have the right to see Fritz's opening book _during_ the games with the various moves that could be played by the engne according to the player's intended move, together with the associated statistics. so in the unfortunate case where Kramnik could not remember is home killer preparation he will have the various choices presented to his eyes during play. Pretty incredible ! and there are quite a dozen rules like that ... (including the right for Kramnik only to call for an adjournement with subsequent overnight computer- or fellow-GM-assisted analysis ...) For those who would like to have a look the complete rules are on Susan Polger's blog : http://www.susanpolgar.blogspot.com/ Lionel Vidal (2006-12-02 09:54:32) A lone engine in CC :-) Suppose I make the following test (it has certainily be proposed before, but let's do it again, for the fun of the argument): - I buy a recent engine (say the new Fritz10) - I play in some CC tournaments (I do not want to pay fees, so let's say, here at FICGS of course :-), and at iecg) - I choose the first moves of all my games based on some statistics made on a CC base (just to avoid some openings statistically bad in CC) - starting from a few moves before the engine goes out of its opening book (to be defined, maybe 4 moves) I let my average computer run 10 hours by move (around one night per move... I know, I sleep too much :-) - I *always* play the very move the engine finds as best - I play as many tournaments as I can, considering the time constraint that limits the number of games (just to get a meaningful rating as fast as possible) Now, what rating do you think I can reach at most, strictly following these guidelines? (note that if I know some basic maths to do the stats, I do not even have to know chess rules... although a basic knowledge is assumed to ease the play in practice) Are you ready to bet on your guess ? :-) In pratice, the test does not work, because the tester dies from boredom long before he gets any rating :-)) Thibault de Vassal (2006-12-06 00:05:33) Deep Fritz 10 ... wins the match 4-2 It's a shock (even if Kramnik said it and repeated - deeeep fritz is favorite). It's hard to explain such a result. Deep Fritz - Vladimir Kramnik 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bc4 e6 7.0-0 Be7 8.Bb3 Qc7 9.Re1 Nc6 10.Re3 0-0 11.Rg3 Kh8 12.Nxc6 bxc6 13.Qe2 a5 14.Bg5 Ba6 15.Qf3 Rab8 16.Re1 c5 17.Bf4 Qb7 18.Bc1 Ng8 19.Nb1 Bf6 20.c3 g6 21.Na3 Qc6 22.Rh3 Bg7 23.Qg3 a4 24.Bc2 Rb6 25.e5 dxe5 26.Rxe5 Nf6 27.Qh4 Qb7 28.Re1 h5 29.Rf3 Nh7 30.Qxa4 Qc6 31.Qxc6 Rxc6 32.Ba4 Rb6 33.b3 Kg8 34.c4 Rd8 35.Nb5 Bb7 36.Rfe3 Bh6 37.Re5 Bxc1 38.Rxc1 Rc6 39.Nc3 Rc7 40.Bb5 Nf8 41.Na4 Rdc8 42.Rd1 Kg7 43.Rd6 f6 44.Re2 e5 45.Red2 g5 46.Nb6 Rb8 47.a4 1-0 It seems to me it was allowed to Kramnik to consult Fritz opening book, so first why to play 8. ...Qc7 !? Daniel De Noose (2006-12-13 14:29:26) Rybka clearly the best ? This week I have tested Rybka againt 3 others engines. The parameters : ---------------- Intel Centrino 725 (1,67 Ghz), 64 Mb Hash Tables, games in 10 minutes (+ 2 seconds per move) for each "player", Shredder 9 interface, 20 games' matches, HS-Masterbook Opening book . The Engines : ------------- Rybka 2.2 W32, Gambit Fruit 1.0 Beta 4bx, Toga 1.2.1a and Shredder 9. The Results : ------------- 1) Rybka - Shredder 9 : 15,5 / 4,5 (+13,-2,=5) 2) Rybka - Toga 1.2.1a : 12 / 8 (+8,-4,=8) 3) Rybka - Gambit Fruit : 13,5 / 6,5 (+10,-3,=7) The comments : -------------- Rybka seems to be clearly the best for the moment ... I would like to test Rybka against other engines like Fritz 10, Shredder 10, ... but I don't have these engines. Perhaps later... ;-) Do you have comments about this ? Marc Lacrosse (2007-01-08 14:53:13) My new little chess site ... ... is located at http://chessbazaar.mlweb.info There will be some computer chess related stuff (opening books, collected ICC games, database processing tips, tests results ...) together with a few games, analyses, and maybe some historical data and so on. Not that much so far, but I wish and hope that the baby will be growing fast :-) Marc Thibault de Vassal (2007-02-10 03:08:52) Rybka, Fritz and future... Computerchess is definitely an exciting challenge... The community is fast-growing, new versions of chess engines appear every day, many dream to be the next Vasik Rajlich and to produce an engine that would beat the well-known Chessbase engines and the famous Rybka. These days, I had a look at Fruit 2.1, TogaII and Crafty source code that are available to download, and started to implement new search & evaluation functions. It's quite easy to understand why chess programming is so addictive, so much done and so much to do... finally I did not enter this mad race without an ending, probably for the same reasons Anthony Cozzie (the author of Zap! Chess Zanzibar) and many others retired. However here are my feelings about future of chess engines, and the fight that just started between most probably Chessbase engines (Fritz, Shredder, Junior and Hiarcs) and a new era of chess engines that started with Rybka... First, it's quite obvious to me that Rybka (now Rybka 2.3) is only another one of a long series of chess engines always stronger than each others ! .. I expect the next ones to reach 50, 100 then 200 points more (and maybe more) on the next chess engines elo rating lists, a scale that definitely can't be compared to human elo rating list ! .. Several reasons to this : (1) Chess engines are human killers at standard time controls, but chess engines are far to play perfect chess yet. (2) The way ratings are calculated. Rybka taught us several things IMO : - Algorithms and evaluation functions are no more enough. Now chess engines have to play chess, not only search a tree of chess positions... That's probably what Rybka brought to computerchess. Since Fruit 2.1 & Toga II source code is available, and computerchess community is constantly discussing improvements in algorithms, evaluations of positions and new ideas, to implement a chess engine becomes easier so I have no doubt that new very strong chess engines like Rybka will come. - To become famous, a chess engine must 'also' beat his rivals. I first thought that Rybka was designed to be an engines killer only (at least before to be an analysis tool) with some tricks exploiting most engines weaknesses. No, Rybka is also a great UCI engine, simply stronger and with many options & features. Like Vasik Rajlich, who is engineer and international chess master, you'll have not only to think like an engineer to create such an engine. However I still don't think it is the best analysis tool for correspondence chess, it doesn't play really better chess and in all cases it is not enough. More, Rybka 3, 4, 5 shouldn't influence correspondence chess (maybe even human vs. machine) much... Computerchess influences computerchess first. It's written sometimes that the strongest chess engines could reach a IM, even GM level at correspondence chess. I definitely disagree with that, at least for the moment (it will take a long time yet), but as chess engines results tend to approach correspondence chess ones (means more and more draws), I do think chess engines have much to learn from correspondence chess players way of thinking, meaning : A more psychological approach, bonus for traps detection. Evaluate moves, not only positions. A more complex search, not 'only' iterative (brute force is definitely useless). No more anti-human style, speculative moves (=weakness, ie. Deep Junior) for speculative results against strongest chess engines, draws are prefered. To avoid positions not understood by the engine. Longer games, closed games (if supported)... Opening books should look like correspondence chess GMs ones (of course according to the engine's style of play) and no more been made of FIDE GM games. A better time management... Future of computerGo may teach to computerchess about some evaluations. A chess engine must play good moves AND try to win (which is not always the same). It seems Fruit & Rybka play solid and are waiting to exploit their opponent's weaknesses thanks to a better "chess" algorithm/knowledge. As far as I have seen, Shredder & Fritz still have the best 'eye', they see far but fuzzy. Quite the same about Fruit & Toga developped by a great engineer, Fabien Letouzey : Less chess knowledge but an improved algorithm. As for Rybka, a great chess knowledge and probably a smarter algorithm (not better, smarter !) were probably enough already. The future best chess engines will be made by good chess players... An interesting point is it could be not so easy, maybe even nonsense, to create the best analysis tool that would also obtain the best results against other chess engines. My first prediction is Rybka won't be the top rated chess engine ever, hundreds of new ideas will appear in all parts of chess programming, slowly breaking Rybka secrets, then speed will be a factor again. Deep Fritz, Junior, Fruit or Hydra are most probably the core of the next generations of chess engines... but there's a lot of work yet :) My two cents. Albert H. Alberts (2007-06-25 14:36:49) World Computer Chess Championship (WCCC) All: JUNIOR has won over Fritz in Elista.RYBKA wins Olympiade Amsterdam. It got me thinking: instead of being an 'engine-to-engine contest can it be that the whole thing is a book-to-book contest? The program that has the best opening book with novelties will come out on top, invariant from the engine. Is that why RYBKA is so good? IM V.Rajlich? The future WC will be the program with the best book. The future WC tournament chess will be the one who knows this book. Maybe they will be one and the same person? Great news for the sport I think. Greetings Albert H. Alberts,Amsterdam www.howtofoolfritz.com Thibault de Vassal (2007-06-25 15:17:50) Rybka's book Sure the secret of Rybka is not its/her opening book ! .. But that's very important matter anyway. Rodolfo d Ettorre (2007-07-01 15:48:37) Re These are times of glory, old lines will be refuted, new systems will be invented and the games will be used as examples in the opening books to come, and we will have the right to say " We were there!!!" Thibault de Vassal (2007-09-09 16:17:20) Waiting list is open The rules are : "FICGS chess no engines tournaments are unrated single round-robin tournaments, involving 7 players. The special rule for these tournaments is that chess engines, databases and opening books are strictly forbidden. All games are played in 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves. Norms are not possible." Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-13 06:35:12) Ratings Hi Phillip I don't know what "an unsynchronised rating system" is. However at the rate of play 40/20 for example I am not sure I would be able to improve so much on the engines first choices. At the free style tournament stand alones do pretty well. If I needed 45 minutes to find one best move in the Topalov Kramnik line..... So yes a centaur can easily have a higher rating than the engine(s) he is using at cc time rates (on the same hardware). For one thing the centaur can use different engines and for another its a bit like taking a move back all the time and pushing past any horizon limitations plus there is the restrictions of opening books that all engines have. However I am not going to play my own cc games against Fritz 10 (Fritz 9 in my case)by giving it 1 day or even 10 minutes per move because I am not motivated - you need the human element for that. Hope that helps. Andrew Stephenson (2007-09-25 10:28:20) Match I have to say guys having worked quite a bit now with Rybka (single procesor version) it has some flaws defending against attacking positions - sometimes underestimating the attackers chances and not just in irrational or very complex positions. So whatever the role of opening books (obviously big) I am not surprised at the result so far. Thats to take nothing away from Rybka - great program. Rodolfo d Ettorre (2008-02-12 13:32:16) Icelandic Gambit ... i have an old opening book, semi open openings written by Ludek Pachman, and it does not mention the Icelandic Gambit, so there must be plenty of "unexplored country" in it, so ... I am in!!! Can we one day have a Centre Opening thematic ? I used to play it very often when I was young, happy and unemployed. Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:19:23) Pachman Yes its true there is a lot of great stuff in these old books Rudolfo but I like to check 'em I have got some Nunn stuff from the same time - incredibly accurate he may have been the best writer of opening books of modern times. Although I am basing that on his Najdorf books not other stuff on the Pirc etc which I dont know so well. Andrew Stephenson (2008-05-13 14:33:15) Opening books I think the truth is that a lot of opening books are not always objective and someimes do not give the best lines or give assessments that are not always accurate. Active GM's someimes keep things back for there own use .. which is understandable I suppose. John watson seems to be an exception to this and produces very high quality opening work. The bottom line is you have to check them all IMO. Incidentally I am not sure there is much need to keep databases up to date - I suppose that refers to downloading games from TWIC. Most databases are up dated automatically. Jason Repa (2008-05-14 21:31:38) corr. & otb "But cc rating does not implicitly say anything about chess strength." I disagree. But first be clear that I'm talking about correspondence chess strength. I never said that corr. chess strength has a 1 to 1 relationship with otb chess strength. I know too many guys who are better corr. players than me that I could mop the floor with at any time control in a live chess game. But having said that, I believe that people have high corr. ratings for a reason. At a minimum they're good at employing interactive chess engine research and have good updated databases. I think overall chess knowledge and judgment are factors as well. Stronger chess moves win more games. Yes, I understand that sometimes an ambitious 1800 can beat a higher rated opponent, on occasion, but it's overall results that are important, not anomalies. The same is true otb. Sometimes experts and national masters beat GMs. That doesn't mean they're a stronger chess player than the GM. "Do you think the playing cc helps to improve your otb abilities?" I'm not surprised you're getting differing stories. Like anything else, it depends on how you use the experience and of course on your individual aptitude. Some people will just memorize the opening theory they learn from corr. chess, if that. Others will do much more with those games, such as developing technique, increasing their strategic knowledge, learn more endgame theory, etc. I think it is without question that corr. chess can have great benefits for your otb chess game, if used properly. Just being forced to comb through opening books and game databases alone is useful. "OTB requires the abilities to calculate deeplines correctly and to maintain concentration for a couple of hours" I agree that the ability to concentrate well is important for otb chess, but I think you're overvaluing calculation. The reality is that otb is all about COMPETITION. It's a mental fight. I know guys are are great analysts, and with the right hardware/software would probably be great corr. players, but they don't handle the pressures and stresses that go along with competition very well. Judgment and competence, especially while under stress and duress, are of the utmost importance in otb. You can calculate as deeply as you want, but if you're expending energy calculating lines that you should have rejected, or mismanaging your time by thinking too deeply in a spot where it's not necessary, you won't get good results in otb. I don't have any desire to try to get anywhere near 2700 level in corr. chess. And I agree with your analysis that it would not be fun anymore and become a huge drain of time sitting behind the computer. Perhaps not unlike what a professional chess player has to go through in order to prepare for their tournaments, with the chief exception that the professional chess player gets paid for such a sacrifice. "...for the purpose of improving the otb abilities it would have been better to study chess books and solving tactical exercises than playing cc." I don't see why these things have to be mutually exclusive. For me I get more motivated to study my chess books and look through my databases when the positions occur in games. I also think about what I'm doing and analyze the positions using my own mind when I play corr. chess. Maybe that's not the case for everyone, but it is for me. As for tactics, I think blitz/bullet against strong opponents can be very useful for developing that. Thibault de Vassal (2008-05-26 12:19:28) Rybka vs Rybka Ok, we all know that engines are not free will. With no randomizer, the regular start position, "normal" settings (do not avoid a draw at any price, regular values) and a large opening book [which is a quite good randomizer itself], I'm quite sure statistics after 500,000 games will look like 50% if Rybka 3 #1 & #2 play as both White & Black, 51 to 53% if Rybka 3 #1 play as White only while Rybka 3 #2 play as Black only, about the same (but not exactly) for Fritz 11 or other engines. Garvin Gray (2008-07-19 10:57:17) Rybka opening book Wayne, Do you really mean MUST? or is it that if you want the super duper Rybka opening book, that is will cost extra, but if you dont, then you can just use any of the older opening books? Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-19 22:19:10) Rybka Opening book Howdy Garvin, My bad I should not have said "must" meant to say " if you wanted Rybka3.ctg you must buy it seperately. Wayne Wayne Lowrance (2008-07-20 02:38:48) Rybka Opening Book In fact I will share an opinion that I have become to trust. That is, even the best books offered have a very short life expectancy. Certainly less than six months with active chess players such that play on "play chess" and even here. Book lines soon become refuted by these centaurs and a new private book of theirs emerges. I will admit that such is the case with me here on Ficgs. I have/use recognized good books that are available, but have my own small book that I consult. Just an opinion and hope this shared info is taken in the helpful way I intended. So this would indicate that R3.ctg probobly is a great book, but against active centaurs will soon reduce its effectivity. Thanks Wayne Thibault de Vassal (2008-09-12 14:39:49) Rybka 3.0 about 2300 at FICGS ? According to Larry Kaufman from Rybka team in the discussion linked above : "If we assume that both sides have the same opening book, then I think two things are fairly safe to say: 1. A good human chessplayer (or even a bad one with good centaur skills) + same Rybka will win a long match from unassisted Rybka. 2. In any individual game, the chance of a draw is fairly high. (...) I mean more than half the games, but not way more. The actual draw percentage depends very heavily on the opening book used." I agree with that, so I assume that Rybka 3.0 thinking at least 24 hours per move would have a correspondence chess rating of about 2300 at FICGS. Any opinion ? Wayne Lowrance (2008-09-13 00:47:03) Rybka 2300 @ FICGS That is interesting Tribault. Do you mean the program running unassisted, no player help, Rybka choose own book moves ? If that is your basis then I say no Way Rybka on FICGS get this rating. There are very many sharp Centaurs playing here. With excellent tuned books. That is the main thing. CC games are won/lost on opening book. I am of the opinion that centaur + program is too strong for Program itself. Results on ICC have demonstrated that. Wayne Don Groves (2008-11-05 08:02:06) 8 x 8 chess variant There is another way to foil the computers and re-energize chess: A screen is placed between the two sides of the chess board and each player places their pieces on the board in accordance with two rules: (1) one pawn on each file; (2) no piece past its own third rank. Then the screen is removed and the game begins with White's first move. Opening books become useless (requiring the computer to begin using its clock from the first move) and the usual endgames will rarely occur (although endgame databases are obviously still useful). Knowing your opponent's tendencies becomes even more valuable than in the normal game. Ben Milton (2008-11-05 14:51:33) opening book I have downloaded the games played on playchess and was wondering how i could make an opening book based on them? Ben Milton (2008-11-05 15:45:54) new book Thank you for the helpful reply, however your method adds new games to an already existing book (e.g. rybka 3.ctg). What i was looking for is to make a new opening book completely based on these games. Is that possible? Ben Milton (2008-11-06 16:47:28) Downloading games Is there a way to download all the long games (non blitz, bullet, etc) above the rating of 2200? Im sure a very strong opening book can be made from that considering that most of the people use engines here... Ben Milton (2008-11-22 18:13:24) ... Also is there a way for me to increase my chess rating? since i am a centaur player using Rybka 3, fritz, zappa, with strong opening books such as perfect 15 (tuned) and at this rating many of my opponents are not even using engines and it the games are not challenging. Regards Ben Milton (2009-01-06 03:22:29) . Im not sure what exactly move mirroring is. Also as i said my opening book is perfect 15 book BUT it is tuned. Thibault Id have put 100 E-points on the line if i had it. At the moment i only have 12. Does anyone believe they can beat the conditions i proposed and are willing to have a game? Tom Smith (2009-01-14 19:13:17) Reply again i also forgot to respond to a couple of points. No I dont consider any engine use cheating, or using opening books etc.I am a average player I think, I dont have a rating or anything and I get whipped by computers, that is why I wondered if it was common practise here to use a computer to play for people as I would just constantly lose in 10 moves if that was the case, this was why I made this thread to see if I can expect to lose every game or whether some people would be like me and just play. In hindsight I couldve made my point a little clearer to have avoided any bad feelings which is why I am now trying to explain more clearly. Thibault de Vassal (2009-06-22 16:41:00) Discussion at Rybkachess That's an interesting discussion... Once more, the confusion reigns between Freestyle chess (commonly played at classical & blitz time controls) and Correspondence Chess, particularly for centaur players who did not experience correspondence chess at a 2500+ level. IMO (in brief) on several points : 1) All these made-for-engines books have no other interest than to "manipulate" chess engines & other made-for-engines books, actually this has almost nothing to do with correspondence chess (where they are completely useless at a high level, let's say 2300+) or even chess. 2) Many players do not realize the multitude of factors that appear to be more important that the basic strength of centaurs once the correspondence chess 2400 mark is reached and that still increases at 2500 and 2600... The higher the level, the more "opening books" depend on the recent games played by the opponent (and his level), the number of current games played, the score to reach in 8 games matches, the importance of rating, the goal in life, even the month/season for a few players and many other things according to the persons... Actually these "openings books" just live the time to use it one time, so a better term is preparation, actually opening books do not exist anymore in correspondence chess at a very high level, at most it may be useful against weaker players. 3) The previous point is enough to explain the rating changes of most 2400+ players ! In example... - GM Farit Balabaev is a very experienced player who constantly has(had) more than 100 running correspondence chess games at several places for years, he's also a fast player, it is quite logical to me that he looks for quiet games and fast draws (or lose sometimes to very strong players who want to win more) - Wolfgang Utesch, FICGS WCH finalist, like many players at one time in their life, decided that other things were more important and that correspondence chess was too time consuming, particularly once the 2500 mark has been reached... - Eros Riccio obviously decided to win every correspondence chess competition at FICGS while playing a high number of games at several places AFTER having topped the FICGS rating list with the highest rating so far (which he did), so it is natural to look for a few quick draws in matches if 8 draws mean a victory for him (and a few rating points lost, that is quite inhuman anyway :)) - Michael Aigner tops most FICGS rating lists by playing only games at 40 days + 40 days / 10 moves time control, which is an enormous performance as obviously the longer the time control, the higher the rate of draws. I do not know how many current games he's playing at ICCF or IECG and other organisations but I suspect he plays a quite reasonable number of games. - Xavier Pichelin may top the FICGS rating list this year as he's an incredibly dangerous player with White and Black and with a reasonable number of running games. Many strong players also choose to play some tournaments for "fun" or to experiment openings and may lose some points while their real strength is over 2500 or more... so it is quite hard to make the difference between the real strength and correspondence chess ratings. So many parameters... It is likely that we'll see one day a 12 games match between Eros and Xavier (Michael do not play fast correspondence chess time control, yet I hope), we all wonder what rating could achieve Vasik Rajlich (Rybka's creator) and other very strong freestyle players but it is very hard to predict only by knowing their results in freestyle tournaments. Correspondence chess is a mirror of real life. Thibault de Vassal (2009-09-27 01:40:59) Fritz 12, your opinion From Chessbase news, Fritz 12 will be out on October 7, 2009 (new opening book by Alex Kure) http://www.chessbase.com/shop/product.asp?pid=467 Did anyone lucky test it already ? What about the interface & engine ? A serious opponent for Rybka 3 ? Michel van der Kemp (2009-10-10 09:26:50) Weekend I agree the weekend will be better for most people, so I vote for the Friday, Saturday, Sunday option. But maybe the c option is viable as well. From my experience freestyle is more a matter having better opening books and then a faster computer, and faster time controls is not necessarily a bad thing. But I like to hear Eros Riccio's opinion on that. Thibault de Vassal (2009-11-19 11:08:27) Chess programming wikispace Someone updated the chessprogramming wikispace for Marc & reminds us that he was also an opening book author for the chess engine Fruit (by Fabien Letouzey). chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Marc+Lacrosse Wayne Lowrance (2009-12-12 20:13:50) Renting Rybka Follow up. I learned a long long time ago that the choice of opening book and move selection is the number one important parameter. Number two is the strength and skill of the Centaur. Here most all is using Rybka as the primary program so it figures that the last dependent variable is centaur skill. Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-05-12 19:31:36) Rybka 4, news, tests & results By the way it is stated here http://www.chessbase.com/espanola/newsdetail2.asp?id=8300 (article is in spanish) by Cheparinov that Topalov's team had access to Rybka 4 during preparation. Also new Rybka opening book author, Jiri Dufek, was on Topalov's team. Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-05-13 03:25:06) Rybka 4, news, tests & results This was posted in the Hiarcs forum by Harvey Williamson:" Now it is all over it is time to share a little secret. The day before the World Championship final in Sofia started I had a conversation with Vishy's team. For the duration of the match they have had access to my fast 8/16 core machine as well as all my databases and Hiarcs opening books. Also, of course, all the engines on my machine. I Hope this managed to negate slightly the fact that Topalov had access to the latest Rybka on its Cluster for a few months leading up leading up to the final." Jimmy Huggins (2010-10-29 14:18:04) Strong Tournament at Rybka Forum well I guess something like 25 days for 30 moves could be possible as only to think that most of the 30 moves could be opening book depending on which opening is choice. Then 10 to 15 days per 20 moves after that. I guess I should follow the time controls here a little closer Garvin Gray (2010-10-31 14:41:18) Creating an opening book No, I do not except people to give away their opening secrets, but I was wondering. How does one create an opening book? I have just been changing options in the fritz or rybka books from green to red and vice versa, but I assume that quite a lot of the decent players on here have proper opening books. What process did you go through to create these books? Thibault de Vassal (2010-10-31 18:24:57) Creating an opening book Well, you may probably enter all your lines in a single game, then use the option that makes a book from it !? (as far as I can remember... definitely I should do it again) Or maybe you can buy it to Ruben :) Sebastian Boehme (2010-10-31 20:11:04) Creating an opening book Hi Garvin, Book making ia for example in my case always been a very time-intense and manually tuned process. I never do import any outside games to my book. Guidelines on how to starting out in creating an opening book you can find (or probably have already found), here: http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforum/topic_show.pl?tid=11798 That site got some useful links General rule of thumb, work on each system one by one. My favourite example: I as white play 1. e4 and Black replies 1....f5, so the Elephant Gambit arises. Now I want to find good white moves for it, so I enable in my Book allow move adding and check my Correspondence and Playchess Games database for the replies of white. Also I see what major engines think about the moves offered by the database in say 1-2 minute analysis and what these engines themselves gotta offer. This way a reply to the elephant gambit (or maybe more) for move 2 of white can be found. Also not in any case 1-2 minute analysis will be sufficient. You need to figure this out for yourself. The less time intensive process: Create a database where you import games filtered by very well chosen criteria (for instance recent games i.e. 2008-2010). Then import the database games into a new empty book. That's all I know about how it could be done. Sebi Garvin Gray (2010-11-07 11:23:10) rybka 4 opening book Hello all, I downloaded the Rybka 4 opening book and have had no end of problems trying to make it work. I have read the rybka forums on adaptors and how to install, but they make about as much sense to me as a foreign language does. I have contacted chessok and now am in back and forth emails about this topic and my dis-satisfaction with the products. Is someone able to explain how to get the rybka 4 opening book to work in aquarium and Fritz 12 in really simple language. No coding please. Jimmy Huggins (2010-11-07 19:03:11) rybka 4 opening book Did you buy the Aquarium Rybka 4 book or just one called Rybka 4 Opening book? If not I maybe able to help. Sent me a PM and I can give you some assistants Garvin Gray (2010-11-08 09:47:13) rybka 4 opening book I bought the Aquarium Rybka 4 book. Big mistake as I do not like Aquarium, but anyways it was my mistake and I am still determined to work in Aquarium how to load the Aquarium opening book. And I have also had no luck with the adaptor provided. I found the threads on RybkaChess useless as they were too technial for me. Tano-Urayoan Russi Roman (2010-11-08 16:34:09) rybka 4 opening book Hello Mr Gray did you check the info from here: http://aquariumchess.com/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Using+the+Rybka+4+Aquarium+Opening+Book&structure=Technical+info , maybe it helps. Jimmy Huggins (2010-11-08 16:51:04) rybka 4 opening book I sent you a PM that may help you. Paul Valle (2011-02-03 01:27:33) Creating an Opening book Hi guys, a couple of chessbase/rybka questions that I hope you can help me with: -how do you create a completely new opening book? -How do you start en engine tournament from a set opening position? Paul Scott Nichols (2011-02-04 00:27:30) Creating an Opening book You click on "file" and then "new" and then "opening book". Name the book whatever you want. Then import games or books into by clicking on analysis, opening book, import games. Part 2, I don't think there is a way, :) Paul Valle (2011-02-04 01:48:42) Creating an Opening book nice! thx Scott Josef Riha (2011-02-04 08:21:04) Creating an Opening book Click on engine-tab and then enginematch. A dialogue appears. Chose engines you like and don't activate any book. Then click on button Opening DB and chose the one you want. This DB contains only opening moves. You can create this by entering moves only with few opening moves and save in a DB you want. For more info click the help-button. Scott Nichols (2011-02-04 18:04:19) Creating an Opening book I never thought of it that way Josef, I guess I knew it would be possible, just never went that far. Now, what you said opens up a lot of possibilities, thanks Josef! :) Josef Riha (2011-02-04 18:11:29) Creating an Opening book No matter, Scott :-) Josef Riha (2011-02-04 22:37:18) Creating an Opening book A little correction: Click on tournament not on enginematch! Paul Valle (2011-02-08 01:06:02) Creating an Opening book Thx Josef! Thibault de Vassal (2013-05-07 13:17:57) Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH As you may know, Eros Riccio won the 8th FICGS chess championship by beating Jeroen Van Assche (who remains undeafeated though, he did not lose a single chess game at FICGS yet) in the candidates final, preventing him to play Eros again in the final. Eros kindly accepted to answer a few questions: - Hello Eros. First of all, congratulations for winning this 8th FICGS correspondence chess championship. Once again, you did not even have to play the 12 games match to defend your title as you won the qualifying tournament. In these conditions, the challenge was really tough for Jeroen Van Assche, in despite of his prodigious chess. He had to beat you consecutively in the candidates final (8 games match), then in the final (12 games match). How did things go in this candidates final? Eros: Hi Thibault, thanks again! I was also worried to have to play a very strong player like Van Assche, but fortunately I had again the advantage that all draws were enough to win, and so my strategy was again not to take risks in all my games. As White it was easy... and surprisingly also as Black. The only game where I had to be more careful than others was this one: 1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.Bg5 e6 7.Qf3 h6 8.Be3 Qc7 9.0-0-0 Nbd7 10.Qg3 b5 11.a3 Rb8. Here Jeroen surprised me with an interesting novelty, 12.Kb1. The two times I had played this position I was White against Gueci and Kruse, and in both games I continued with 12.Bxb5 but couldn't get more than a draw. The idea of 12.Kb1 is to sacrifice a Pawn for the initiative after 12...b4 13.axb4 Rxb4 14.Nb3 Nxe4. The White Bishops are very strong after 15.Nxe4 Rxe4 16.Bd3 Ra4 17.Bd4 and fully compensate the Pawn less. Anyway I managed to defend, and when I was finally able to trade the Queens we agreed for the Draw. - You also won the ICCF Umansky Memorial a few weeks ago, the italian correspondence chess championship (again) as well, obviously you played numerous games last year, what do you plan for the next months? By the way, Jeroen already qualified for the candidates final of the 9th cycle, meaning that he may play you in the final match next year if you defend your title again, is there a chance that we can see a revenge? Eros: Yes, like in the past, also last year I have played a lot of games... anyway for the future I am planning to reduce my games a lot. At the moment, except a few games in minor tournaments, I am only playing for the italian colors at the Olympiads and European Championship, for ICCF. I didn't register for the new Italian Championship this time... I prefer to wait that another individual top ICCF Tournament starts. And of course I am also waiting to meet my next challenger for the FICGS Final! Maybe it will be Van Assche again, we have to see if he beats his opponent in the semifinal (actually next candidates final). - It looks like a few chess engines reached a certain maturity, I mean algorithms. As a consequence, the computer speed may become the major evolution factor during the next years, that is generally slower than the program's improvements (but the future may have surprises, of course). What do you expect from the computer chess world in the next few years and its impact on correspondence chess? Eros: As I have already said in a previous interview, being chess probably a draw with perfect play, the more engines get stronger, the more draws we will see. That's quite obvious. - You probably do not play chess over the board so often, yet you have a quite good ELO! (about 2200, while many correspondence chess masters are rated below 2000 or not rated at all) By the way, I can certify that you are a strong blitz player after we met a few years ago. Do you still play tournaments? Eros: I am not playing otb chess for a few years, my peak was 22... and a few points, I don't remember exactly. One of the main reasons why I stopped is because later, when analyzing my games with an engine... every time I got frustrated a lot seeing all the blunders I was making. - Do you estimate that playing OTB chess is good to improve at correspondence chess? Eros: Yes, it's useful especially if you develop a strategical style, then also in your corr. games you can see more easily "long-term-strategy" plans, which is still the "weakest strenght" in all engines. - Do you feel that you're still improving at correspondence chess? If yes, is it mainly a question of opening book or something else? Eros: Improving at corr. chess... hmm... I will surprise you with my thought about this matter! I think I can evaluate my strenght according to the speed of the computer I am analyzing my games with. When I bought this computer, 3 years ago, I felt like I could beat the corr. World Champion. Now... as my computer is becoming older and older, I feel like my play is getting weaker each day it passes. So my answer is that I am still getting worse at corr. chess, not improving. Attila Ba (2013-05-11 16:56:56) Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH Do you ever overrule the engine? ( I mean, have you ever made a move which was considered inferior by the engine. ) Are you willing to make moves suggested by opening books even if there valued less then optimal by the engine? Eros Riccio (2013-05-11 17:32:04) Eros Riccio on his win in 8th chess WCH Attila, sometimes it happens that I play a move that is not the first suggestion of the (supposed) best engine. Anyway I usually use more than one engine for analysis and it may happen that they all suggest different best moves, so it's not always easy to say what is a best move, also because even if you analyze with one engine only it may change his best move if you give it more thinking time. Anyway it happens very rarely that I play a move which is not in the top 3 houdini suggested moves. As for the second question, yes, I would trust (not always of course) a good opening book, as if the book has a good score with that move it means that it contains games which led to wins. It also depends on the quality of those games, but a good quality book should contain high-level games, so why not trust it? Philip Roe (2013-10-03 21:01:42) Tablebases and no-engines tournaments Bogoljub, When you enter the tournament by clicking on the waiting list, you are told that "chess engines, databases and opening books are strictly forbidden". I guess the idea is to reproduce OTB conditions as closely as possible. Lazaro Munoz (2013-10-14 15:43:45) Tablebases and no-engines tournaments But most endgame books (I assume books are allowed) these days use tablebase results, for that matter so do many opening books on computer analysis results. Francois Caire (2016-11-12 16:48:17) Stockfish fixes memory leak in Syzygy I tested it and after a 24 hour analysis in an endgame position, stockfish was using only 2.6 Gb of ram with 2Gb hash size. http://abrok.eu/stockfish/ Author: Marco Costalba Date: Sat Nov 5 07:55:08 2016 +0100 Timestamp: 1478328908 Rewrite syzygy in C++ Rewrite the code in SF style, simplify and document it. Code is now much clear and bug free (no mem-leaks and other small issues) and is also smaller (more than 600 lines of code removed). All the code has been rewritten but root_probe() and root_probe_wdl() that are completely misplaced and should be retired altogheter. For now just leave them in the original version. Code is fully and deeply tested for equivalency both in functionality and in speed with hundreds of games and test positions and is guaranteed to be 100% equivalent to the original. Tested with tb_dbg branch for functional equivalency on more than 12M positions. stockfish.exe bench 128 1 16 syzygy.epd Position: 2016/2016 Total 12121156 Hits 0 hit rate (%) 0 Total time (ms) : 4417851 Nodes searched : 1100151204 Nodes/second : 249024 Tested with 5,000 games match against master, 1 Thread, 128 MB Hash each, tc 40+0.4, which is almost equivalent to LTC in Fishtest on this machine. 3-, 4- and 5-men syzygy bases on SSD, 12-moves opening book to emphasize mid- and endgame. Score of SF-SyzygyC++ vs SF-Master: 633 - 617 - 3750 [0.502] 5000 ELO difference: 1 No functional change. Thibault de Vassal (2017-01-18 03:32:56) GM Eros Riccio 12th WCH & chess Finally, here is a new interview with FICGS correspondence chess champion GM Eros Riccio, who gives us his (surprising?) impressions on his latest win in the championship, his current match and correspondence chess nowadays... A good matter to think about! http://www.ficgs.com/user_page.php?page=tournament&tournament=FICGS__CHESS__WORLD_CHAMPIONSHIP__000012 ____________ - Hi again Eros... Once more, congratulations for winning this final match in the 12th FICGS correspondence chess championship. This time, it seems that things went quite differently than in your previous matches (you scored 9 out of 12, which is a huge performance at this level), could you tell us what happened in these games? --> Hi, yes, finally we have seen some wins after a very long series of draws. I was surprised too, I didn't risk to lose any game and I could even win one as Black... What to say, my opponent was simply not as challenging as the previous ones. - It's a long time since you won the previous match, would you like to tell us about your other results this year, particularly at ICCF where you now rank #9 with an outstanding 2643 rating? --> My latest final on FICGS were my only games of 2016. On ICCF I have taken some rest, the too high draw rate didn't incentive me to start new tournaments, also because drawing all games with a high rating means losing points. - In the next final match (13th cycle), you play Peter W. Anderson for the 3rd time... so you probably know each other's opening book quite well. What do you expect for in this match? --> Anderson is a very tough opponent, it's not a coincidence that he reached the final for the third time. I tried to win at least one game as White, but he's incredibly hard to beat. I experimented with almost anything possible against his modern defence, but I could never find a single weakness in his repertoire. I will see what to invent this time against his terrific 1...g6. - As you probably know, another Go champion (Lee Sedol) lost a 5-games match to AlphaGo this year, while chess engines (now Stockfish 8, Houdini 5 Komodo 10...) slowly but surely continue to improve... Still waiting for the quantum computers. How do you feel things should go in the next years? Did your way of playing advanced chess or correspondence chess change these last years? --> I have said a lot already about the very high draw rate of the recent years... I am surprised that some changes haven't been done already, like switching to chess 960, even modifying some chess rules, or at least giving 1,5 points for one win. Otherwise a lot of players will lose interest in seeing a series of all draws in the tournaments they play. I am one of those players who lost interest in correspondence chess, and even in blitz chess, engine vs engine, as we can see the extremely high draw rate situation there too. - Finally, what can we wish for you for the next year? :) --> Wish me to lose the match with Anderson :-) even I got bored of seeing myself there over and over in the final! That will bring some new air and that way I can take some total rest in corr. chess. - Many thanks for your time, have a great match! --> Welcome, and thanks. Garvin Gray (2017-12-14 11:47:49) AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish Even more I read about this result, the more I am inclined to put this result in the 'nice story' but the devil is in the detail. The time control was 1 minute per move, no tablebases and limited hardware for Stockfish. This is a major limiting factor for any of the major programs and not how they are designed to work. Also reading the chessbase article, as I suspected, AlphaZero was able to play many, many games against the Stockfish program, but Stockfish had no such opportunity against AlphaZero. And so with each game, AlphaZero and the programmers had the opportunity to learn about Stockfish's strengths and weaknesses. Stockfish had no such opportunity. The only way to see if AlphaZero and its MonteCarlo system is any good is for it to enter the next Computer World Championship and play under equal equipment against all the best chess programs. Same time control, same processing power , opening books tailored for each engine and tablebases available for each engine. That is the only way to find out how good the next version of AlphaZero really is. Ilmars Cirulis (2017-12-14 12:09:18) AlphaZero stronger than Stockfish Conspiracy theories and not understanding of Deepmind motivation. They tested if the concept works. It was success. They are satisfied and start working on other interesting/useful stuff, as they mostly don't care about chess. The only training of AlphaZero happened when it played against itself. Stockfish was just an opponent to play against - to check how strong has AlphaZero became. AlphaZero too had no opening book or endgame tablebases, so that's not relevant. Etc. etc., basically too much conspiracy theories and too much caring about which is the most strongest engine (at least in comparison to Deepmind, as they are totally chill about it, imho :D). :) Daniel Parmet (2017-12-24 18:51:20) Monte Carlo Analysis I thought the whole idea of IDEA was a human thought merge of computer analysis through MCA? I had the thought about using MCA with chess engines as the brain nearly 5 years ago at work. My boss loved the idea and tasked me with it. However, I have no coding skills so my ability was limited to what was available which was extremely limited at the time. The best way to think of MCA is to accept that we don't know what move is best (hence why Alphazero didn't have or want an opening book or games database). From here now, it's like trying to predict what's best and what will come from flipping a coin 5 million times. You know in a coin scenario that it is 50%. But what about the stock market? A lottery ticket? A game of black jack? Or Chess? Each individual decision could yield 50.1% in favor and by MCA you will find it. It will create a tree that shows a RANGE of your worst possibilities to best on a probalistic manner. The most common use is for wealth management investing. As for how to change off the Fritz engine, I don't know. I could never figure that out (though I only have the Fritz 13 gui). I guess I was hoping this feature would be improved over time. Perhaps now due to Alphazero, it will be. Thibault de Vassal (2018-09-24 00:15:43) Some questions to H. Kruse, WCH finalist After that the last FICGS chess WCH final match finished, the choice was made again to ask a few questions to Eros Riccio's challenger: Herbert Kruse, for the 2nd time. He kindly accepted to answer it so let's learn a bit more on our top-ranked correspondence chess player. ______________________________ Hello Herbert, you're not really a player to introduce as you're very active here and at several chess websites for years, with outstanding ratings in each one (as far as I know), you're the 1st FICGS CUP winner & several times FICGS WCH challenger, each time facing "the wall" Eros Riccio, what could you tell us about yourself particularly as a chess & correspondence chess player? - i began late with 16 to play my first tournament game, but with 18 i already was kicked out of a night club in company with tony miles ;) (dresscode) had vlastimil hort as trainer for a short time and played in teams with gutman, michalchisin, klovans, gipslis and some other GMs. corr chess i began, because i love to find the truth and because of freestyle, where i began to build very strong computers What kind of computers do you build? Is it all dedicated to chess? - i have several dual xeon e5 computers with 64gb ddr3 and 16 to 20 real cores and they all play chess ;) Once again, GM Eros Riccio managed to draw the 12 games of the match. What are your feelings on these games? How did you estimate your chances to destabilize your opponent in the openings and to create complications enough with White (or Black)? - this time my feelings were neutral. 1% chances to win, but i hoped he would lose his concentration if i began more games with him (we played 6 other games at the same time) Doesn't "1% chances to win (the match)" mean about 0.17% to win only one game with White, even when losing one with Black? Isn't it a bit pessimistic after all, or is it the new so called Riccio-effect? :) - if the strongest players face each other there is no win possible, except some has a mouse slep or forgot something during human interfacing When did you start playing correspondence chess and what changed since that time? What attracted you most in the game? - 2004 and evaluation of the position is the key point of improvement since then. attractive was to be better than actual world class players :) Could you tell us anything on the way you work chess and play your correspondence games? Any tip or secret? (nothing to lose to ask :)) - with black i play for fastest way to 0.00 and with white i try every promising way to make a game for a longer time complicated Do you use several ones at the same time when analyzing a game? (still grabbing some tips) - i only use the newest stockfish versions of brainfish and corchess because the other engines are not so good. because i have many games i decide which one gets the most cores and time and let them run in infinity mode until i am happy that can be after 1 week or more sometimes. You're not far to rank 2nd as a poker player at FICGS, you obviously started to take on Big Chess as well. What other games do you play? Did you consider to play Go already? - i played go against the german champion and lost so i quit :)) played backgammon money game and internet (in fibs with kit woolsey i played over 100 matches) in bridge i was best bidder in germany 1994 to 1995, but dont play much nowadays Do you have specific goals to achieve as a player? - 2 goals, since a long time: be ficgs world champion and win one german bridge championship How do you imagine correspondence chess evolution within a decade? What kind of engines/computers do you expect to use and what will look like centaur chess according to you? (in other words, what part will remain to the human player in the decision?) - i think the engines today are already unbeatable, so in 20 years the would still not lose and chess is dead since about 4 years What did you think about Google Deepmind's Alpha Zero performance vs. Stockfish? - it was a joke because they let a bad version of stockfish play. i would not have lost one game against az0 and maybe won 2 til 5 out of 100 Conditions of this AlphaZero vs. Stockfish match were very specific (opening books, unbalanced hardware...) What weaknesses did you detect in AlphaZero play? - it was the lack of precision, what would let it lose against stockfish in its tuned newest version but i look from a view of a player who is used to play with deep 60 :) It seems that computers did not completely take on Bridge yet, what do you expect within a decade? - i have not seen bridge programms, but the game is so easy that it must be already mastered by computers Miroslav Gazi (2019-04-26 22:48:11) Chess DB What do you think about using special DB e.g. https://chesswind.eu/ Could it be interesting for creating opening books? Scott Ligon (2025-04-23 15:21:53) Stockfish unbeatable at modest settings? My goal is to find the minimal setting where Stockfish can't be beaten, or close to the minimal setting anyway. The title of the thread shows my point of view on this issue. I think currently available versions of Stockfish with relatively modest computing power are already good enough to be unbeatable, regardless of how much money an opponent is being offered or how many supercomputers and grandmasters they have at their disposal when devising a strategy. From the starting position of a game of chess, it simply isn't that hard for modern engines to hold the draw with black. The draw rate on this very site is evidence. I could make the task easier by generating a small opening book to keep Stockfish out of trouble in the opening, so in the case of Stockfish 17 @ 15 million nodes it might be good enough to simply dictate that it play e5 in response to e4 (I don't know if that specific example is true but it might be - I never found any trouble spots for that strategy with black outside of the Sicilian). But I want to do this with no opening book and also no access to endgame tablebases, just the engine's recommendation using a set number of nodes for the search. The settings I've tried so far fell short, but I think they weren't far off, so I'm taking only small steps forward. Stockfish 17.1 @ 10 million nodes seems like a good next step to me. If somebody finds a winning line against it, then I'll take the next step, either increasing the node count or if enough time has passed I'll move on to the next version of Stockfish. George Jempty (2025-06-26 23:39:19) I did not win a game since 3 years Yeah the only reason I'm winning in one of my games right now is because of poor play by my opponent. But 12 years ago or so I had an unbeaten streak for 2 years or so, with plenty of wins along the way (even one with Black with the Siesta variation against the Ruy) from an initial rating of 1900 or so, up to 2200+. The only reason I'm playing again now is too get some fodder for a chess opening book (about a different variation for Black against the Ruy) I've begun to write.
[Chess forum]
[Rating lists]
[Countries]
[Chess openings]
[Legal informations]
[Contact]
[Social network] [Hot news] [Discussions] [Seo forums] [Meet people] [Directory] |
|
Support to all people under attack
Social network : create your photo albums, discuss with your friends... Hot news & buzz : discover the latest news and buzz on the internet... Discussions : questions and answers, forums on almost everything... Seo forums : search engines optimisation forums, web directory... Play the strongest international correspondence chess players !
|