The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!

31 views
Skip to first unread message

Ed Schroder

unread,
Mar 7, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/7/97
to

The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!

Today the Cdrom with the Crafty big book (90 Mb) finally arrived (thanks
Moritz!) and the 1:100 match has started.

The comparison 50-60 game match on equal tournament time (4:30 average)
will start in a few days too.

You will find the match at:

http://www.xs4all.nl/~rebchess/match.htm

Make your bets now!

- Ed Schroder -

Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> Make your bets now!

Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.

I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

-- Peter

May God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
courage to choke the living shit out of those who piss me off,
and wisdom to know where I should hide the bodies...

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

: > Make your bets now!

: Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.

: I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

Nope. If Crafty loses, I think something is badly wrong in my eval,
but I'll wait to see. However, draws are likely. A lot's going to depend
on the positions the book leaves us in. If it's like the CM5000 game in
the "Kup", I'll be more than happy. :) But it is likely that at least
a game or two or three will leave the book in an endgame... The question
will be is it the type of endgame that is simply drawn, period.

I haven't looked at Ed's home page yet, but hope he can give the eval
and depth for the moves...


brucemo

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
> Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
> : Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>
> : > Make your bets now!
>
> : Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
>
> : I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
>
> Nope. If Crafty loses, I think something is badly wrong in my eval,
> but I'll wait to see. However, draws are likely. A lot's going to depend
> on the positions the book leaves us in. If it's like the CM5000 game in
> the "Kup", I'll be more than happy. :) But it is likely that at least
> a game or two or three will leave the book in an endgame... The question
> will be is it the type of endgame that is simply drawn, period.

You might lose some games. But draws are certainly very likely.

I did an 8-game match with your Crafty on chess.net (p6/200) versus Spinach, which
is Ferret on a P5/133, thinking for 50 milliseconds, no pondering. Got blanked.

I then did a 10-game five-minute blitz match Crafty vs Pinky, which is the same
thing thinking for 167 milliseconds, and scored half a point, as both of them came
out of book with a negative score, and they happened to decide to do a 3x
repetition right away.

Mike Byrne did a match with a full-out Crafty versus Pinky and Pinky managed to get
like 20%, but Byrne was not using a P6.

My intent was to show that sometimes a good program will defeat another good
program even when it is at a severe speed disadvantage. I certainly didn't show
that in this recent experiment, but I think I may try again.

I certainly saw a lot of good positions go up in smoke due to massive tactics.

bruce

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:

Those are the ones that doubling *both* sides time will tend to clear up. If you
are doing 100ms searches, tactics are nasty. if you were playing 5 mins per move
vs the equivalent extension for crafty, my tests generally find that the # of
draws goes up a good bit, and the weaker side will occasionally toss in a win too.

The thing Ed and I will find out is not just a small difference, but what happens
at deep depths, if one side gets an additional 3-4 plies. That's not been tested
anywhere that I know of. In fact, once we get the data, we ought to write this up
for the JICCA, as another chapter in the tests that have been done in the past...


Tom C. Kerrigan

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
> Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

> > Make your bets now!

> Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.

> I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

> -- Peter

Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

Cheers,
Tom

dong...@aol.com

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

In article <3322F2...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> writes:

>Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>> Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
>> : Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
>>
>> : > Make your bets now!
>>
>> : Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
>>
>> : I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
>>

>bruce
>
>

Interesting. I have recently played around with time handicap games myself and have discovered that perhaps "raw speed" is the current "end all be all" performance factor in chess computers today.

Your findings seem to support this as well?

In the test I ran, I went a step further by pitting a relic (RadioShack ChessChampion 2150 cir.1988) against a modern world computer champ, MChess Pro 5.0 on my P75.

I determined the handicap of :02 seconds for MCP5 to be the most equal with CC2150's :30 seconds per move level, in an attempt to nullify "raw speed" as a performance factor.

After 10 games, the score sits at 5-5!

Conclusions?
1.)In chess, all things being equal, there is strong parity amongst programs of today and yesterday, but the Hyatt axiom "Speed Kills" is still an absolute. :-(

2.)Ed, you are an eternal optimist. ;-)

3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer. Rebel 8 may not draw a single game, let a lone win one.

yours in chess,
Don

Ramsey MN USA

brucemo

unread,
Mar 9, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/9/97
to

dong...@aol.com wrote:

> 3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer. Rebel 8 may not draw a single game, let a lone win one.

Ah. I would never go this far though. The games I was playing were blitz games, so
at 1/6 second per move my program was getting almost no depth.

You may get different results in super-blitz vs blitz than you would at blitz vs
standard, or standard vs correspondence, because you get enough depth to play
reasonable chess.

If I'm playing super-blitz vs blitz, the positions are full of shallow tactics that
I won't see. There will still be deep tactics at standard vs correspondence, but
there may be fewer of them.

I can think of a couple more interesting experiments, one of which Ed and Bob are
already doing. I'll be interested to see if Rebel can get anything against Crafty
in any of these games. It may find tactics that Crafty doesn't see, but I think it
is more likely that it may reach strategically safe situations and draw, or reach
positions where it has an advantage, and push through for a very difficult win. I
don't know how Rebel and Crafty compare with each other, but I think it would be
likely that Crafty could do the same thing to Rebel were the situation reversed.

I'd also be interested in seeing what happens to the draw rate when two programs
play games at various speeds (not handicap games, but instead games where both
programs are using the same time control). For instance, if two programs play
super-blitz against each other, would draws be less likely than if they play
standard against each other? More draws may indicate a reduced chance of finding
knock-out tactics. In autoplay 5 0 games I have noticed a lot of draws, but in
autoplay "game in 15 second" games, draws seem to be rare.

This is all related to the notion of "tactical sufficiency", as recently debated at
length in this newsgroup. I think that it is likely that there is such a thing, but
that rather than being at some defined point, it may manifest as a reduced liklihood
of knockout tactics existing as search depth increases. I haven't done any
experiments though, I just have some ideas.

Another experiment might involve studying the liklihood that a program will change
its PV move at a particular depth. I bet changes between depth 1 and depth 2 are
very common, but I doubt you see as many between depth 8 and depth 9. If you never
change your PV move you aren't playing any more strongly if you think longer, so
perhaps this is some of the source of this notion that computers don't get much
stronger if they search a lot deeper (longer).

I would like to see examples where programs find POSITIONAL moves after having done
deep searches. For instance, a move is considered to be positionally "right", but a
program doesn't plan to play it until it's working on a 10-ply search or soemthing,
then suddenly it switches to that move for the first time. I think this might be
indicative of a program really understanding the positional elements present. I
think I would trust this more than I would seeing a program choose some positionally
"right" move at depth 2 and sticking with it permanently.

An example might be BK position #2, in which some programs play d5 immediately, but
I've never heard of any that would switch to it after thinking for five minutes.

3r1k2/4npp1/1ppr3p/p6P/P2PPPP1/1NR5/5K2/2R5 w - - 0 1

A program that would play d5 quickly here is demonstrating "instinct", not
"understanding". I wonder if instinct is really worth very much?

I think there may have been some "findable" deep positional problems in the CCR test
suite developed by Kaufmann.

Once again, I have no experimental data, just ideas.

bruce

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Tom C. Kerrigan (kerr...@merlin.pn.org) wrote:
: Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: > Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

: > > Make your bets now!

: > Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.

: > I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

: > -- Peter

: Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

: Cheers,
: Tom

I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

:)


Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:
: dong...@aol.com wrote:

: > 3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer. Rebel 8 may not draw a single game, let a lone win one.

: Ah. I would never go this far though. The games I was playing were blitz games, so
: at 1/6 second per move my program was getting almost no depth.

: You may get different results in super-blitz vs blitz than you would at blitz vs
: standard, or standard vs correspondence, because you get enough depth to play
: reasonable chess.

: If I'm playing super-blitz vs blitz, the positions are full of shallow tactics that
: I won't see. There will still be deep tactics at standard vs correspondence, but
: there may be fewer of them.

: I can think of a couple more interesting experiments, one of which Ed and Bob are
: already doing. I'll be interested to see if Rebel can get anything against Crafty
: in any of these games. It may find tactics that Crafty doesn't see, but I think it
: is more likely that it may reach strategically safe situations and draw, or reach
: positions where it has an advantage, and push through for a very difficult win. I
: don't know how Rebel and Crafty compare with each other, but I think it would be
: likely that Crafty could do the same thing to Rebel were the situation reversed.

This is the one "weak" link in our experiment. If Ed has some neat eval
trick that I don't know about in crafty, then he might play into a position
that crafty thinks is dead even, while Rebel realizes that it is dead won.
That can always happen. Might happen the other way too of course, but
that wouldn't be a surprise since crafty already has a 3+ ply search
advantage...


: I'd also be interested in seeing what happens to the draw rate when two programs

: play games at various speeds (not handicap games, but instead games where both
: programs are using the same time control). For instance, if two programs play
: super-blitz against each other, would draws be less likely than if they play
: standard against each other? More draws may indicate a reduced chance of finding
: knock-out tactics. In autoplay 5 0 games I have noticed a lot of draws, but in
: autoplay "game in 15 second" games, draws seem to be rare.

: This is all related to the notion of "tactical sufficiency", as recently debated at
: length in this newsgroup. I think that it is likely that there is such a thing, but
: that rather than being at some defined point, it may manifest as a reduced liklihood
: of knockout tactics existing as search depth increases. I haven't done any
: experiments though, I just have some ideas.

: Another experiment might involve studying the liklihood that a program will change
: its PV move at a particular depth. I bet changes between depth 1 and depth 2 are
: very common, but I doubt you see as many between depth 8 and depth 9. If you never
: change your PV move you aren't playing any more strongly if you think longer, so
: perhaps this is some of the source of this notion that computers don't get much
: stronger if they search a lot deeper (longer).

: I would like to see examples where programs find POSITIONAL moves after having done
: deep searches. For instance, a move is considered to be positionally "right", but a
: program doesn't plan to play it until it's working on a 10-ply search or soemthing,
: then suddenly it switches to that move for the first time. I think this might be
: indicative of a program really understanding the positional elements present. I
: think I would trust this more than I would seeing a program choose some positionally
: "right" move at depth 2 and sticking with it permanently.

Good idea. Here is *your* mission. Find a neat positional game. Not one
with a lot of tactical fireworks. IE, find a karpov vs someone game. Let's
let a group of programs "annotate" that game with *very* deep searches. And
then lets produce some stats for each program, to answer two questions:

1. as time extends, what's the chances of finding a different move;

2. ditto, but find a *better* move. :)

would be *very* interesting to see if 4x the time finds a better move.
However, we'll need to post the annotated game and get some good chess
players to look over them as well to see if the moves are better or worse.
Perfect place for Martin you-know-who here. :)

: An example might be BK position #2, in which some programs play d5 immediately, but

: I've never heard of any that would switch to it after thinking for five minutes.

: 3r1k2/4npp1/1ppr3p/p6P/P2PPPP1/1NR5/5K2/2R5 w - - 0 1

: A program that would play d5 quickly here is demonstrating "instinct", not
: "understanding". I wonder if instinct is really worth very much?

and some play it because it is known to be the right move (supposedly) and
they've been tuned to do so. :)


: I think there may have been some "findable" deep positional problems in the CCR test

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

dong...@aol.com wrote:
: In article <3322F2...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> writes:

: >Robert Hyatt wrote:
: >>
: >> Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: >> : Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
: >>
: >> : > Make your bets now!
: >>
: >> : Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
: >>
: >> : I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
: >>

: >> Nope. If Crafty loses, I think something is badly wrong in my eval,

: Conclusions?
: 1.)In chess, all things being equal, there is strong parity amongst programs of today and yesterday, but the Hyatt axiom "Speed Kills" is still an absolute. :-(

: 2.)Ed, you are an eternal optimist. ;-)

: 3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer. Rebel 8 may not draw a single game, let a lone win one.

: yours in chess,
: Don

I agree about the huge handicap. a very good test is to take crafty,
with ponder=off, and give one copy 2x the time of the other. The
win/loss ratio is usually quite significant...

I don't agree about draws. The book will play an imortant role here,
although in endgames, that 3+ ply search advantage might translate into
6-10... which *might* be important...

Moritz Berger

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

On 10 Mar 1997 02:02:30 GMT, hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
wrote:

>Tom C. Kerrigan (kerr...@merlin.pn.org) wrote:
>: Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
< snip >

>: Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

>: Cheers,
>: Tom

>I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

beer like drink in the area of cologne (Koeln). The name means
"something from Koeln", which is a better description for it than beer
;-) Some people say its more a kind of lemonade with alcohol ... It's
usually served in long, thin glasses in a quantity of 0,2l.

Wow, now I will be flamed ... ;-))))

Moritz

-------------
Moritz...@msn.com

Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Tom C. Kerrigan <kerr...@merlin.pn.org> wrote:

> Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

At least one guy with a sense for the important things
in life on this newsgroup...

Bring the bottle to the next world micro. Bring some for yourself, you
will need it 8^)

Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

<dong...@aol.com> wrote:

> After 10 games, the score sits at 5-5!

Interesting.



> Conclusions? 1.)In chess, all things being equal, there is strong parity
> amongst programs of today and yesterday, but the Hyatt axiom "Speed Kills"
> is still an absolute. :-(

SPEED SPEED SPEED !!! We have plenty. But still we are not satisfied 8^)



> 2.)Ed, you are an eternal optimist. ;-)

I agree. Nevertheless it is a brave thing to do for Ed. I mean, if it
will be the massacre most of us are expecting it takes a man to post
those games on his commercial web site.

> 3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer.

Too bad 8^) Well, I'll drink Tom's Koelsch then... More takers ?

> Rebel 8 may not draw a single game, let a lone win one.

That's a bit unlikely. I guess that in the end it will be 8-2 for
Crafty. 1 loss, 2 draws (shit happens even to deep searchers).

Albert Silver

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

In article <5fvqcm$r...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>,
hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

> : In the test I ran, I went a step further by pitting a relic (RadioShack

ChessChampion 2150 cir.1988) against a modern world computer champ,
MChess Pro 5.0 on my P75.

>
> : I determined the handicap of :02 seconds for MCP5 to be the most equal with

CC2150's :30 seconds per move level, in an attempt to nullify "raw speed"
as a performance factor.

>
> : After 10 games, the score sits at 5-5!
>
> : Conclusions?


> : 1.)In chess, all things being equal, there is strong parity amongst programs

of today and yesterday, but the Hyatt axiom "Speed Kills" is still an
absolute. :-(

>
> : 2.)Ed, you are an eternal optimist. ;-)
>
> : 3.)I won't be the guy buying anyone a bavarian beer. Rebel 8 may not draw a


single game, let a lone win one.
>

> : yours in chess,
> : Don
>
> I agree about the huge handicap. a very good test is to take crafty,
> with ponder=off, and give one copy 2x the time of the other. The
> win/loss ratio is usually quite significant...
>
> I don't agree about draws. The book will play an imortant role here,
> although in endgames, that 3+ ply search advantage might translate into
> 6-10... which *might* be important...

Although I'm not arguing that Rebel will win the handicapped match, I
don't think the match giving Mchess 2 seconds is really significant to
disprove Ed. As I recall, Bob told us that when your machine is
calculating 14-16 plys every move, adding another couple of plys isn't
going to give the machine a huge difference in strength. Though when you
go from 4 plys to 6, then it IS significant. That's why Ed only accepted
the wager if Rebel could think for 3-4 minutes at which point it will see
quite a bit, and he doesn't think that just adding a few plys will give a
weaker program (no offence Bob) a crushing edge. Still, though it is
interesting, I don't think that this will prove anything as far as Deep
Blue is concerned because as Bob pointed out, it suffers NO slowdown no
matter how many algorithms it uses, and that is definitely not the case
for programs running on microcomputers. Getting back to the Mchess match:
give IT 2-3 minutes and the other the same proportionate advantage in
time, and see if it still only manages to draw the match (you can even
repeat the openings), and I'll bet heavily in favor of Mchess.

Albert Silver

-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet

Albert Silver

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

In article <5fvqoc$r...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>,
hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:


> Good idea. Here is *your* mission. Find a neat positional game. Not one
> with a lot of tactical fireworks. IE, find a karpov vs someone game.

> : bruce

How about Fischer - Reschevsky US Championship 1962-3 (game no.43 in his
60 memorable games)? That game always struck me as being an absolute
masterpiece in position play and clarity.

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:

: That's a bit unlikely. I guess that in the end it will be 8-2 for


: Crafty. 1 loss, 2 draws (shit happens even to deep searchers).

My take is slightly different. I'm expecting something like (just
a wild guess here) 6 wins, 4 draws... or 6 wins, 3 draws, 1 loss,
although the loss is just to be safe. If you throw out the draws,
and only count wins, it might be closer to your 9-1 result, and
the result I'd expect against DB. However, there are some positions
where depth doesn't matter... only a really stupid player could lose
some hopeless draws (some Petrov lines come to mind where the queens
and most pieces are gone with equal pawn structure remaining.

Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Tom C. Kerrigan <kerr...@merlin.pn.org> wrote:

> Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

Tom you did misunderstand something here. You have to put the bottle of
Koelsch on *Rebel*. I mean, who will drink all that stuff if Crafty wins
as we all expect it ?!

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:

: I agree. Nevertheless it is a brave thing to do for Ed. I mean, if it


: will be the massacre most of us are expecting it takes a man to post
: those games on his commercial web site.

I don't think it takes bravery here at all, because even if he loses
10-0, it doesn't mean a thing, other than he would also lose by that
or worse against Deep Blue. It doesn't mean a thing about Crafty
being better or worse than Rebel, of course, because 100X is a truly
*huge* computing advantage.

The other match will be more interesting from a purely pragmatic point
of view (He's going to run a *normal* match after (/during?) the
humongous match, just to provide us with information about how Crafty
does on equal timing. If Crafty was to lose 2 for every one it wins
at the equal match, but still win big in the handicap match, it lends
even more credibility to the speed difference issue. The only bad
outcome, which is not likely, is that should Crafty win 2 for every
1 it loses at equal time controls, then the big match would not mean
much. As I said, very unlikely. I'm curious about both parts of this
myself...

Bob


Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Moritz Berger <Moritz...@msn.com> wrote:

[ Koelsch ]

> Some people say its more a kind of lemonade with alcohol ...

With alcohol ? Are you sure ? Really ? ;)

> It's
> usually served in long, thin glasses in a quantity of 0,2l.
>
> Wow, now I will be flamed ... ;-))))

No you won't. Basically you are right. It *is* lemonade 8^) But
sometimes lemonade is ok too 8^)

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Albert Silver (ka...@embratel.net.br) wrote:

: Although I'm not arguing that Rebel will win the handicapped match, I


: don't think the match giving Mchess 2 seconds is really significant to
: disprove Ed. As I recall, Bob told us that when your machine is
: calculating 14-16 plys every move, adding another couple of plys isn't
: going to give the machine a huge difference in strength. Though when you
: go from 4 plys to 6, then it IS significant. That's why Ed only accepted
: the wager if Rebel could think for 3-4 minutes at which point it will see
: quite a bit, and he doesn't think that just adding a few plys will give a
: weaker program (no offence Bob) a crushing edge. Still, though it is
: interesting, I don't think that this will prove anything as far as Deep
: Blue is concerned because as Bob pointed out, it suffers NO slowdown no
: matter how many algorithms it uses, and that is definitely not the case
: for programs running on microcomputers. Getting back to the Mchess match:
: give IT 2-3 minutes and the other the same proportionate advantage in
: time, and see if it still only manages to draw the match (you can even
: repeat the openings), and I'll bet heavily in favor of Mchess.

: Albert Silver

Your idea becomes *very* difficult to test. I tried this with the
famous Cray Blitz vs Genius match a few years ago. The problem was, to
let the fast program reach a normal time control /depth, the slow program
ends up getting forever. It's difficult for me to sit and watch a game
that takes 48 hours to complete (remember, genius is manual so it takes a
human.) In the case of Rebel/Crafty, it's all automatic, so we can really
pick any sort of experiment we'd like, start it up, and check in on the
progress weekly. At least it's not unbearably tedious to make this
happen.

I've tried some tests like you suggest with my old Mach III, but jeez...
if you give Crafty 3 minutes on a P6, you have to give that old 16mhz
68000 forever. talk about getting bored. :)

We will learn two important pieces of information from "the experiment"
however...

1. how Rebel and Crafty compare (something likely only interesting to
me of course... or to those fooling around with Crafty or helping me test
and modify it.)

2. how much 3-4 plies are worth. IE, if the even-up match has them playing
reasonably close to each other strength wise, and the 3-4 ply handicap match
doesn't result in an overwhelming margin of victory for Crafty, then I'll
likely re-think what I'm doing, particularly with the idea of making it
faster on parallel machines and so forth. And try to stick at the current
10-12 plies in the middlegame, and use new speed for more eval, more
extensions, or whatever. If the 3-4 plies does produce a signficant
margin of victory, as compared to the equal-time match, then I'm going to
continue to work on speed/depth and add knowledge as I go, so long as it
doesn't dominate the speed issue too badly.

Be interesting...


Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Albert Silver (ka...@embratel.net.br) wrote:
: In article <5fvqoc$r...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>,
: hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

: Albert Silver

Can you post it in PGN? Or at least a reasonable set of moves, and I'll
fake the PGN headers myself. We can give it a whirl. How about any IM's
that are familiar with this game... good candidate?? We really want a
game that is as tactics-free as possible, so it's all strategic. We know
the machines will pick up on the tactics... but the issue is, when searching
*very* deep, does the extra depth produce anything of strategic value, or is
the only gain tactical??

mclane

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

>Tom C. Kerrigan (kerr...@merlin.pn.org) wrote:

>: Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
>: > Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

>: > > Make your bets now!

>: > Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.

>: > I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

>: > -- Peter

>: Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.

>: Cheers,
>: Tom

>I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

>:)

Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types
of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
different beers we have.
We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural
ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.

Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.

Can Peter or Tom explains us the different taste of Koelsch in
relation to others ?!

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: Moritz Berger <Moritz...@msn.com> wrote:

: [ Koelsch ]

: -- Peter

Personally, I don't drink *anything* that is yellow when drunks are
anywhere around. :)


Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 10, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/10/97
to

Robert Hyatt <hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> wrote:

> Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
>

> : I agree. Nevertheless it is a brave thing to do for Ed. I mean, if it
> : will be the massacre most of us are expecting it takes a man to post
> : those games on his commercial web site.
>
> I don't think it takes bravery here at all, because even if he loses
> 10-0, it doesn't mean a thing, other than he would also lose by that
> or worse against Deep Blue. It doesn't mean a thing about Crafty
> being better or worse than Rebel, of course, because 100X is a truly
> *huge* computing advantage.

But it is still a dangerous thing to do. I am sure that many potential
customers don't understand the technical implications of 100:1 time
odds, let alone the scientific idea behind the match. Will peek at Ed's
website tonite to see how he presents this...

> The other match will be more interesting from a purely pragmatic point
> of view (He's going to run a *normal* match after (/during?) the
> humongous match, just to provide us with information about how Crafty
> does on equal timing. If Crafty was to lose 2 for every one it wins
> at the equal match, but still win big in the handicap match, it lends
> even more credibility to the speed difference issue. The only bad
> outcome, which is not likely, is that should Crafty win 2 for every
> 1 it loses at equal time controls, then the big match would not mean
> much. As I said, very unlikely. I'm curious about both parts of this
> myself...

Didn't realize that you both want do to a "calibration" match after the
100:1 time odds match. Great idea IMHO. Since Rebel didn't compete in CC
events for some time (last time was the wccc in 95 I think) it will be
interesting in any case... I will not bet any beers on the outcome of
that 2nd match of course 8^)

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: Robert Hyatt <hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu> wrote:

Me either... although I'd probably lean toward Rebel 8 if the stakes were high
enough and I *had* to pick a side. :)


Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:

> hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

[ snip ]

> >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

Bob, are you saying that you didn't drink one at the world championship
in Cologne ? I surely had my fill with Bavarian beer that was produced
in mainland China in Hong Kong... They licensed it from us 8^)


> Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types
> of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
> different beers we have.

In the part of Germany where I was born (Frankonia) every village has at
least one brewery. Many have two. 6 houses and a brewery. Go figure 8^)
I think I recall that I have read some years ago that there are more
than 6,000 different German beers, but I am not totally sure. Could be
more.

> We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural
> ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.

500+ years old Bavarian law. Expanded to the whole republic later...



> Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.

"Used" is probably the right word. Some days ago a friend brought this
PowerBook 520c (french system software. Yikes!) over and asked me to
install a weird HP printer. But before I did that we "installed" a
couple of beers. His words 8^)



> Can Peter or Tom explains us the different taste of Koelsch in
> relation to others ?!

Worse 8^)

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:

: > hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

: [ snip ]

: > >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

: Bob, are you saying that you didn't drink one at the world championship
: in Cologne ? I surely had my fill with Bavarian beer that was produced
: in mainland China in Hong Kong... They licensed it from us 8^)

Actually I wasn't at Cologne... I had just started work on my Ph.D. here
and couldn't take off for that long. Harry Nelson went, and we operated
Cray Blitz remotely and had it relay the moves to the tourney. So no, I
wasn't there. "twas a pity however... would have loved to made the trip
Harry and his wife had a great time, and spent another couple of weeks touring
Europe (and dragging that 40kg block of plexiglass we won around with them.:) )


:
: > Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types


: > of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
: > different beers we have.

: In the part of Germany where I was born (Frankonia) every village has at
: least one brewery. Many have two. 6 houses and a brewery. Go figure 8^)
: I think I recall that I have read some years ago that there are more
: than 6,000 different German beers, but I am not totally sure. Could be
: more.

This sounds like one of those signs in the men's room? IE, "please flush
twice, it's a long way to the local brewery." :)


: > We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural

Rolf Tueschen

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

>The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!

>Make your bets now!

>- Ed Schroder -

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


To all:

Krafti vs Rebel intelligence foreseen as (between) 4-6 and 3-7.

No doubt about it.


Tueschen R. March 11 1997

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mclane

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

gil...@ilk.de (Peter W. Gillgasch) wrote:

>mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:

>> hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

>[ snip ]

>> >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

>Bob, are you saying that you didn't drink one at the world championship
>in Cologne ? I surely had my fill with Bavarian beer that was produced
>in mainland China in Hong Kong... They licensed it from us 8^)


What, Bob was in cologne ? World computer-championship ? Where Ed was
strong and Richard not at his best ? Or do you speak of boring human
championships?

>
>> Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types
>> of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
>> different beers we have.

>In the part of Germany where I was born (Frankonia) every village has at
>least one brewery. Many have two. 6 houses and a brewery. Go figure 8^)
>I think I recall that I have read some years ago that there are more
>than 6,000 different German beers, but I am not totally sure. Could be
>more.

>> We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural


>> ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.

>500+ years old Bavarian law. Expanded to the whole republic later...
>
>> Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.

>"Used" is probably the right word. Some days ago a friend brought this
>PowerBook 520c (french system software. Yikes!) over and asked me to
>install a weird HP printer. But before I did that we "installed" a
>couple of beers. His words 8^)
>


Install a couple of beers ?! AhA.

mclane

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

>Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
>: mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:

>: > hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

>: [ snip ]

>: > >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

>: Bob, are you saying that you didn't drink one at the world championship
>: in Cologne ? I surely had my fill with Bavarian beer that was produced
>: in mainland China in Hong Kong... They licensed it from us 8^)

>Actually I wasn't at Cologne... I had just started work on my Ph.D. here


>and couldn't take off for that long. Harry Nelson went, and we operated
>Cray Blitz remotely and had it relay the moves to the tourney. So no, I
>wasn't there. "twas a pity however... would have loved to made the trip
>Harry and his wife had a great time, and spent another couple of weeks touring
>Europe (and dragging that 40kg block of plexiglass we won around with them.:) )


I was at cologne, its a massive time back ? When was it ? 1986 ?

>: > Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types


>: > of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
>: > different beers we have.

>: In the part of Germany where I was born (Frankonia) every village has at
>: least one brewery. Many have two. 6 houses and a brewery. Go figure 8^)
>: I think I recall that I have read some years ago that there are more
>: than 6,000 different German beers, but I am not totally sure. Could be
>: more.

>This sounds like one of those signs in the men's room? IE, "please flush


>twice, it's a long way to the local brewery." :)

Although this is off-topic, anybody joins it. Aha. We are humans. We
can do more than talk about computerchess. We can talk a lot about
drugs and toilets.


Tom C. Kerrigan

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
> hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
> >Tom C. Kerrigan (kerr...@merlin.pn.org) wrote:
> >: Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
> >: > Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> >: > > Make your bets now!
> >: > Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
> >: > I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
> >: > -- Peter
> >: Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.
> >: Cheers,
> >: Tom
> >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?
> >:)

> Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types
> of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
> different beers we have.

At least 5k microbreweries, I've read...

> We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural
> ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.

Well, it's not a law anymore, thanks to the EC. Most German beers are
still compliant, though.

> Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.

Eh? "Used"? You make it sound like we wash our cars with it. :)

> Can Peter or Tom explains us the different taste of Koelsch in
> relation to others ?!

Well, Koelsch looks/tastes more like Pils than Alt. My personal theory is
that Alt is watered down topsoil. :) Anyway, I think it's a bit smoother
than the average Pils, and a bit thicker than my personal favorite, wheat
beer. (Which is my personal favorite because it doesn't taste so bad,
plus it comes in great big cool-shaped glasses.)

BTW, I always get Koelsch from bottles that are a lot bigger than ,2l...

Cheers,
Tom

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
: gil...@ilk.de (Peter W. Gillgasch) wrote:

: >mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:

: >> hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

: >[ snip ]

: >> >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?

: >Bob, are you saying that you didn't drink one at the world championship
: >in Cologne ? I surely had my fill with Bavarian beer that was produced
: >in mainland China in Hong Kong... They licensed it from us 8^)


: What, Bob was in cologne ? World computer-championship ? Where Ed was


: strong and Richard not at his best ? Or do you speak of boring human
: championships?

He's speaking of the 1986 World Computer Chess Championship, which was
won by Cray Blitz. No, I wasn't there. Harry Nelson, from Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory (The nuclear physics guys) was a member
of the Cray Blitz "team of 3" and went there as part of his vacation
that year...

Jack Nerad

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Ed Schroder wrote:
>
> The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!
>
> Today the Cdrom with the Crafty big book (90 Mb) finally arrived (thanks
> Moritz!) and the 1:100 match has started.
>
> The comparison 50-60 game match on equal tournament time (4:30 average)
> will start in a few days too.
>
> You will find the match at:
>
> http://www.xs4all.nl/~rebchess/match.htm

>
> Make your bets now!
>
> - Ed Schroder -

The current eval for Crafty (3/11 at 14:30 EST) is -.188 by Crafty and
.36 by Rebel8. Does this mean that Crafty is losing? Assuming that
Crafty will pull ahead, how long, IYO, will it take before the advantage
becomes apparent?

Jack Nerad

Peter W. Gillgasch

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Tom C. Kerrigan <kerr...@merlin.pn.org> wrote:

> mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:

> > We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural
> > ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.
>
> Well, it's not a law anymore, thanks to the EC. Most German beers are
> still compliant, though.

Right. There was a *huge* discussion about the admission of foreign
beers in Germany that are not compliant.



> > Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.
>
> Eh? "Used"? You make it sound like we wash our cars with it. :)

You don't ?



> Well, Koelsch looks/tastes more like Pils than Alt. My personal theory is
> that Alt is watered down topsoil. :)

Hey, Alt is ok ! You know this Toten Hosen song, don't you ?

> Anyway, I think it's a bit smoother
> than the average Pils, and a bit thicker than my personal favorite, wheat
> beer. (Which is my personal favorite because it doesn't taste so bad,
> plus it comes in great big cool-shaped glasses.)

Cool. We agree on wheat beer being the best. Now the tie breaker:

Do you prefer:

Light wheat beer (looks yellow/golden)
Dark wheat beer (dark brown stuff)

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Jack Nerad (JNE...@concentric.net) wrote:

: Jack Nerad

Much too early. -.188 is "chickenfeed" for crafty, which sees positional
scores of +1.5 to -1.5 all the time, and occasionally sees them bounce to
+/- 5.000 at times.

When either gets to +1.000 or -1.000, then the other side will start getting
worried or happy. :) For now, it's just a game...

brucemo

unread,
Mar 11, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/11/97
to

Jack Nerad wrote:

> The current eval for Crafty (3/11 at 14:30 EST) is -.188 by Crafty and
> .36 by Rebel8. Does this mean that Crafty is losing? Assuming that
> Crafty will pull ahead, how long, IYO, will it take before the advantage
> becomes apparent?

I looked at these scores and thought to myself, "Given that it is so early
in the game, I bet that what is going on here is that Rebel is playing
white in a Sicilian Defense", and in fact, that is what is happening.

You can't be ahead all the time in every game, especially if you play black
in some of them.

This is why most of us would prefer to play white.

bruce

ShaktiFire

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Well for my two cents worth... and with my chess knowledge
thats about all you get :-).

I think 0.36 advantage is still in the mud, not yet significant.
The game to me looks like a tactical melee in the making
and I would rather slug it out at 14 plies than 9 plies.

Does anyone have this in one of the 1 million game
databases? Probably not, it looks unusual, but could
you all check anyhow?

Best Wishes

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:
: Jack Nerad wrote:

: > The current eval for Crafty (3/11 at 14:30 EST) is -.188 by Crafty and
: > .36 by Rebel8. Does this mean that Crafty is losing? Assuming that

: > Crafty will pull ahead, how long, IYO, will it take before the advantage
: > becomes apparent?

: I looked at these scores and thought to myself, "Given that it is so early
: in the game, I bet that what is going on here is that Rebel is playing
: white in a Sicilian Defense", and in fact, that is what is happening.

: You can't be ahead all the time in every game, especially if you play black
: in some of them.

: This is why most of us would prefer to play white.

: bruce

I just hope to be ahead in *some* of them. :) One *very* difficult lesson
I've learned over 25+ years of doing this is to be careful of the expectations
I have when popping out of book. If you try to maximize your score, chances
are you are coming out in a drawish position, which is what we saw too much
of in the last few games Cray Blitz played... I've since modified my "wants"
to now reach positions where the score is negative, but there is some inklings
of compensation for that - score. IE, unbalanced positions, where Crafty (or
any program) has a chance to play... If you watch crafty, you'll notice that
it is almost always - coming out of book, but the position is unbalanced enough
that (against people) it has something to struggle with. I don't want positions
where (say) my opponent has an isolated queen-pawn, but there's *nothing*
else going on, because that is an easier position to play for both sides. If
there are unbalanced aspects of the position, you have to commit to one or the
other, usually. That gives chances for something good (and something bad at
times of course) to happen...


mark lefler

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to


> Ed Schroder wrote:
> >
> > The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!

Great web spot showing Rebel's analysis. Ed, could you also post Crafts PV
and analysis?

Oddly, crafty has so far only matched one of Rebels predicted moves.

For what it's worth, I put the same positions in my program NOW and it
agrees rather closely with Rebel on all but one move (which was a
transposition). NOW's score are also much closer to Rebels so far.

This will be a very interesting match!

-->Mark Lefler

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

mark lefler (72626...@compuserve.com) wrote:

: -->Mark Lefler

Don't forget the depth difference. That can really change the prediction
and scores a significant amount. the only funny part here is that the poor
hash table has 384,000 entries. at 100K nps, this works out to a saturation
factor that has only been the subject of nightmares, since crafty's searching
about 36,000 seconds, that works out to be some 3,600,000,000 nodes per
move, or about 10000X saturation. Good thing ed's machine has DRAM... it
would melt magnetic cores.. :)

It's certainly stress-testing my replacement policy. :)


Ed Schroder

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

From: "mark lefler" <72626...@compuserve.com>

: Great web spot showing Rebel's analysis. Ed, could you also post
: Crafts PV and analysis?

I created the analyze text with Rebel's option "Game to Textfile".
I discovered a feature in Rebel8 I wasn't even aware of... :))
- Game to Textfile;
- a:game1.txt
Rebel8 analyse on flop ready to port to the Internet without leaving
the program.

I noticed this trick also works for Crafty (using a:) for file output.
But perhaps Bob knows the right command to get Crafty's analyze this way?

After game-1 I will make Crafty's complete logfile available anyway.

Rolf Czedzak

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch wrote: <199703090448542055741@[194.121.104.134]>

PWG> Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
PWG>
PWG> > Make your bets now!
PWG>
PWG> Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
PWG>
PWG> I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?

Bavarian beer -looks like You're not very confident about the outcome
of the match. Or do You just want to get rid of some stuff? ;-))

PWG> -- Peter

Rolf C

Rolf Czedzak

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Robert Hyatt wrote: <5g1ku2$j...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>

RH> Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
RH>
RH> : May God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
RH> : courage to choke the living shit out of those who piss me off,
RH> : and wisdom to know where I should hide the bodies...
RH>
RH> Personally, I don't drink *anything* that is yellow when drunks are
RH> anywhere around. :)

Don't worry, Peter's sig isn't directly related to "Koelsch", although ...
;-)

Rolf C

Rolf Czedzak

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch wrote: <19970310154828441536@[194.121.104.133]>

PWG> Tom C. Kerrigan <kerr...@merlin.pn.org> wrote:
PWG>
PWG> > Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.
PWG>
PWG> At least one guy with a sense for the important things
PWG> in life on this newsgroup...
PWG>
PWG> Bring the bottle to the next world micro. Bring some for yourself,
PWG> you will need it 8^)

You already drunk Your bottle(s) of beer?? Or how comes You can't get
right who's betting on what outcome? ;-)))

Rolf Czedzak

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

Robert Hyatt wrote: <5fvq3m$r...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>

RH> I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?
RH>
RH> :)

Some fluid, they call beer in the Cologne region. Blonds use it to
wash their hair.

Rolf C

Albert Silver

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

In article <19970312005...@ladder01.news.aol.com>,

shakt...@aol.com (ShaktiFire) wrote:
>
> Well for my two cents worth... and with my chess knowledge
> thats about all you get :-).
>
> I think 0.36 advantage is still in the mud, not yet significant.
> The game to me looks like a tactical melee in the making
> and I would rather slug it out at 14 plies than 9 plies.
>

Actually, what might be interesting would be to see what Rebel thinks
when IT reaches that depth. Sure, for the match it's only going a few
minutes, but for analytical purposes, would it change it's moves or
evaluation significantly if it were to go that deep in it's calculations?
Ed?

Harald Faber

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

quoting a mail from mclane # prima.ruhr.de

Hello mclane,


m> From: mcl...@prima.ruhr.de (mclane)
m> Subject: Re: The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!
m> Organization: Prima e.V. Dortmund


m> >: > Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
m> >: > I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
m> >: > -- Peter

m> >: Eew. I'll put a bottle of Koelsch on Crafty.
m> >: Tom

m> >I'm going to regret this, but what the hell is a bottle of koelsch?
m> >:)

m> Ha ! American meets german beer !!! Here in germany we have many types
m> of beer. Maybe Peter Gillgasch (as an expert for beer) knows HOW MANY
m> different beers we have.
m> We have also a special law that says that in a beer only natural
m> ingredients have to be used. So NO chemical or whatever stuff.
m> Koelsch is a beer that is used in the area of cologne.
m> Can Peter or Tom explains us the different taste of Koelsch in
m> relation to others ?!

Better ask Podz-Blitz (K.-H. Podzielny) at next tournament at short time
controls, he knows almost everything about beer and will laugh at you for
this "...no chemical stuff..."
He always tells you that he ordered test reports about German beers from
the Stiftung Warentest every month. He can tell you which beers are otu of
chemical stuff.... :-)


Harald
--

Harald Faber

unread,
Mar 12, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/12/97
to

quoting a mail from gillga # ilk.de

Hello Peter,


PWG> From: gil...@ilk.de (Peter W. Gillgasch)
PWG> Subject: Re: The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!
PWG> Organization: Organised ? Who ? Me ?

PWG> Ed Schroder <rebc...@xs4all.nl> wrote:

PWG> > Make your bets now!

PWG> Crafty will surely kill Rebel at this time odds match.
PWG> I am betting one bottle of Bavarian beer. Anybody ?
PWG> -- Peter

I would take Bitburger, Flens or Jever, no compromise. :-)


Harald
--

Amir Ban

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Tom C. Kerrigan wrote:

>
> mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
> > hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
> > >Tom C. Kerrigan (kerr...@merlin.pn.org) wrote:
> > >: Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:

[intensive alcohol discussion snipped]

> Cheers,
> Tom

Why is it, whenever a r.g.c.c thread becomes really busy, you can bet
that beer or beer-cans are being discussed ?

Amir

Tom C. Kerrigan

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:

> > Anyway, I think it's a bit smoother
> > than the average Pils, and a bit thicker than my personal favorite, wheat
> > beer. (Which is my personal favorite because it doesn't taste so bad,
> > plus it comes in great big cool-shaped glasses.)
> Cool. We agree on wheat beer being the best. Now the tie breaker:
> Do you prefer:
> Light wheat beer (looks yellow/golden)
> Dark wheat beer (dark brown stuff)

Light, but only a bit over Dark...

For worst beer, I'd have to go with Diebels... Uff...

Cheers,
Tom

mclane

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

Amir Ban <ami...@msys.co.il> wrote:

>Amir

Because we are humans ! Computers don't drink! And don't buy cans of
beer.


Harald Faber

unread,
Mar 13, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/13/97
to

quoting a mail from hyatt # crafty.cis.uab.edu

Hello Robert,


RH> From: hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
RH> Subject: Re: The Crafty-Rebel NPS challenge started!!!
RH> Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham

RH> : > Good idea. Here is *your* mission. Find a neat positional game. Not
RH> : > one with a lot of tactical fireworks. IE, find a karpov vs someone
RH> : > game. : bruce

RH> : How about Fischer - Reschevsky US Championship 1962-3 (game no.43 in his
RH> : 60 memorable games)? That game always struck me as being an absolute
RH> : masterpiece in position play and clarity.
RH> : Albert Silver

RH> Can you post it in PGN? Or at least a reasonable set of moves, and I'll
RH> fake the PGN headers myself. We can give it a whirl. How about any IM's
RH> that are familiar with this game... good candidate?? We really want a
RH> game that is as tactics-free as possible, so it's all strategic. We know
RH> the machines will pick up on the tactics... but the issue is, when
RH> searching *very* deep, does the extra depth produce anything of strategic
RH> value, or is the only gain tactical??

Ok it is here, look at subject "Fischer-Reschevsky"


Harald
--

Martin Zentner

unread,
Mar 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/14/97
to

mclane wrote:
>
> Amir Ban <ami...@msys.co.il> wrote:

[... history of posters deleted ...]



> >[intensive alcohol discussion snipped]
> >
> >> Cheers,
> >> Tom
>
> >Why is it, whenever a r.g.c.c thread becomes really busy, you can bet
> >that beer or beer-cans are being discussed ?
>
> >Amir
>
> Because we are humans ! Computers don't drink! And don't buy cans of
> beer.

Anyway, it would be nice, if people would change the subject, when
they start discussing off-topic. This would make it easier to
read a large newsgroup like r.g.c.c.

As long as it is somehow related to computer chess, I wouldn't want
to miss those discussions, but please use a new topic !

I would certainly like to know, who's getting pissed, when, why, etc.
But normally I would not expect this to be the 100th repply to
an old announcement. Therefore this is likely to be missed. :-(

And you can't expect, that everyone has the time to read every
article posted here. (ok, Bob maybe has the time :-)

Do not just hit the reply button and start typing without changing the
subject, although this seems logical. Maybe it's even possible to edit
some of the original posting, when including it. Please, keep it short
and to-the-point. Especially Bob includes everything from previous
postings although just referencing few points.

Thanks

-Martin

--
Martin Zentner, University of Passau [http://www.uni-passau.de/]
E-Mail: mailto:zen...@phil.uni-passau.de
WWW: http://www.phil.uni-passau.de/linguistik/staff/zentner/

Tom C. Kerrigan

unread,
Mar 14, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/14/97
to

Amir Ban (ami...@msys.co.il) wrote:

> Why is it, whenever a r.g.c.c thread becomes really busy, you can bet
> that beer or beer-cans are being discussed ?

Because [some] beer is pretty good stuff.

It's not like such discussions suck enough bandwidth to preclude
conversations about, say, hash table replacement schemes.

Cheers,
Tom

mclane

unread,
Mar 15, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/15/97
to

Martin Zentner <zen...@phil.uni-passau.de> wrote:
>> Because we are humans ! Computers don't drink! And don't buy cans of
>> beer.

>Anyway, it would be nice, if people would change the subject, when
>they start discussing off-topic. This would make it easier to
>read a large newsgroup like r.g.c.c.

>As long as it is somehow related to computer chess, I wouldn't want
>to miss those discussions, but please use a new topic !

Sorry Martin.


Tim Mirabile

unread,
Mar 16, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/16/97
to

hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:

>Albert Silver (ka...@embratel.net.br) wrote:
>: In article <5fvqoc$r...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>,
>: hy...@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
>
>
>: > Good idea. Here is *your* mission. Find a neat positional game. Not one
>: > with a lot of tactical fireworks. IE, find a karpov vs someone game.
>: > : bruce


>
>: How about Fischer - Reschevsky US Championship 1962-3 (game no.43 in his

>: 60 memorable games)? That game always struck me as being an absolute

>: masterpiece in position play and clarity.
>

>: Albert Silver


>
>: -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------
>: http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet
>

>Can you post it in PGN? Or at least a reasonable set of moves, and I'll

>fake the PGN headers myself. We can give it a whirl. How about any IM's

>that are familiar with this game... good candidate?? We really want a

>game that is as tactics-free as possible, so it's all strategic. We know

>the machines will pick up on the tactics... but the issue is, when searching
>*very* deep, does the extra depth produce anything of strategic value, or is
>the only gain tactical??

[Event "?"]
[Site "ch-USA"]
[Date "1962.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Fischer,R"]
[Black "Reshevsky,S"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B90"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. h3 g6 7. g4 Bg7 8. g5 Nh5
9. Be2 e5 10. Nb3 Nf4 11. Nd5 Nxd5 12. Qxd5 Nc6 13. Bg4 Bxg4 14. hxg4 Qc8 15.
Qd1 Nd4 16. c3 Nxb3 17. axb3 Qe6 18. Ra5 f6 19. Qd5 Qxd5 20. Rxd5 Kd7 21. gxf6
Bxf6 22. g5 Be7 23. Ke2 Raf8 24. Be3 Rc8 25. b4 b5 26. Rdd1 Ke6 27. Ra1 Rc6 28.
Rh3 Bf8 29. Rah1 Rc7 30. Rh4 d5 31. Ra1 Rc6 32. exd5+ Kxd5 33. Rd1+ Ke6 34. Rd8
Kf5 35. Ra8 Re6 36. Rh3 Bg7 37. Rxh8 Bxh8 38. Rxh7 Re8 39. Rf7+ Kg4 40. f3+ Kg3
41. Kd3 e4+ 42. fxe4 Rd8+ 43. Bd4 Kg4 44. Rf1 Be5 45. Ke3 Bc7 46. Rg1+ Kh4 47.
Kf3 Rd7 48. e5 Rf7+ 49. Ke4 Rf5 50. e6 Bd8 51. Bf6 Bxf6 52. gxf6 Rxf6 53. Kd5
Rf2 54. Re1 1-0

We have Fischer's very detailed notes to go by, so perhaps this is a good game
to look at.

--
Tim Mirabile <t...@mail.htp.com> - http://www.webcom.com/timm/
Visit my homepage for information on USCF & FIDE rated chess on Long Island.
TimM on the Free Internet Chess Server - telnet://fics.onenet.net:5000/
Webmaster, tech support - ICD/Your Move Chess & Games: http://www.icdchess.com/
The opinions of my employers are not necessarily mine, and vice versa.

Jack Nerad

unread,
Mar 18, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/18/97
to

The point of the match is to see how many points stronger a program
becomes given greater amount of search time, correct? The series of
games played after the ten game time-odds match will be used as a
reference for judgement of this point. My question is this: will only
ten games in the time-odds match provide an accurate enough measure of
this statistically?


Jack Nerad

Robert Hyatt

unread,
Mar 18, 1997, 3:00:00 AM3/18/97
to

Jack Nerad (JNE...@concentric.net) wrote:
: The point of the match is to see how many points stronger a program


: Jack Nerad

possibly not, but the obvious problem is the games are going to take a long
time to play. As in weeks per game. If the experiment doesn't end pretty
quickly, it will span a time-frame that covers multiple rebel and Crafty
revisions. If the split is 8-2, the extra depth will be pretty convincing.
If it is 2-8, then it will say that Rebel's evel is much better than Crafty's.
If it is anything like 5-5 it will be inconclusive. Game one is interesting.
It was played with Crafty not having a book, and Crafty went into this g6
variation of the Sicilian on its own. It then followed that with the c4
stuff to open the position up a little. And finally, it ended up with a
passed e-pawn that may or may not mean anything in this game. Unfortunately,
passed pawns are *very* valuable in Crafty's evaluation, and it found a way to
make one, at the expense of exposing itself to an attack of sorts. So, the
game is interesting. I'd bet that if the timing were equal, that Rebel would
probably win this game handily because of the attacking potential for white.
*but*...Crafty is searching very deeply, and white's king is not all that safe
either. After the expected Rb6 and Nd8 both sides have to walk a thin line
for a while. White probably will try Bc1 to prevent Rh6 which pins the white
queen on the king.

In short, it's an interesting game. Certainly not the typical boring
"computer" games we see all the time...

As to whether we can conclude anything about the speed difference, we'll just
have to see how the first few games go. One person has already gone on the
podium and claimed that Rebel's going to win the match even with the handicap.
If Rebel doesn't, I hope that poster will fade away, since he relies more on
emotion than on fact.

You can run this test yourself if you have Crafty and xboard/winboard...

try

xboard -mm -fcp "crafty xboard st=30" -scp "crafty xboard st=300" and see
what happens. 10:1 time odds. I do this a lot, and the 10-1 odds is an
overwhelming advantage...