Engines performance for selected openings

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

User avatar
Laskos
Posts: 10948
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
Full name: Kai Laskos

Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Laskos »

As an offshoot of the thread http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 8&start=70 I am posting here some results of 7 engines (Houdini 3, Komodo 5, Critter 1.6, Stockfish 2.3.1, Rybka 4.1, Hiarcs 14, Junior 13) for various, common opening positions 2-6 moves deep.

First, I adjusted time controls for each engine, so that they become pretty equal in strength. The time controls varied, from 60ms/move for Houdini to 600ms/move for Junior. The strength adjusted results using Frank Quisinsky 5,000+ opening 8 mover positions are:

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %       Elo    +   -    Draws

  1 Junior 13                      : 2428.5/4620  52.6   3015    9   9   27.5 %
  2 Houdini 3                      : 2407.5/4630  52.0   3012    8   8   36.1 %
  3 Hiarcs 14                      : 2386.5/4629  51.6   3009    9   9   27.4 %
  4 Critter 1.6                    : 2339.0/4590  51.0   3006    8   8   33.3 %
  5 Komodo 5                       : 2348.5/4622  50.8   3005    8   8   31.4 %
  6 Rybka 4.1                      : 2152.0/4523  47.6   2986    8   8   33.1 %
  7 Stockfish 2.3.1                : 2048.0/4606  44.5   2967    8   8   31.8 %
I then took 10 common openings from the CSS rating list of Klaus Wlotzka and using these 7 engines, I compared their scores with that obtained previously, when I used 5,000+ opening 8 mover positions. We can see if engines overperform or underperform in these short (2-6 moves) openings.

420 games for each opening, 120 games per engine, errors 2SD are 50-55 Elo points.


Grunfeld
[D]rnbqkb1r/ppp1pp1p/5np1/3p4/2PP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance  

  1 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  79.5/120  66.2   3100    +133  
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  71.5/120  59.6   3057     +51
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.0/119  51.3   3008      -1
  4 Houdini 3                      :  57.5/120  47.9   2987     -25
  5 Komodo 5                       :  56.5/120  47.1   2982     -23 
  6 Junior 13                      :  49.5/120  41.2   2947     -68
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  43.5/119  36.6   2918     -68


Dutch - Staunton-Gambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/ppppp1pp/8/5p2/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - 0 2[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  70.5/120  58.8   3053     +47  
  2 Komodo 5                       :  69.5/120  57.9   3048     +43
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.5/120  51.2   3007      -2
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  60.5/119  50.8   3005     +38
  5 Houdini 3                      :  58.0/119  48.7   2992     -20
  6 Rybka 4.1                      :  51.5/120  42.9   2958     -28
  7 Junior 13                      :  47.5/120  39.6   2937     -78


Nimzo-Indian
[D]rnbqk2r/pppp1ppp/4pn2/8/1bPP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  69.0/119  58.0   3048     +42
  2 Komodo 5                       :  65.0/119  54.6   3028     +23
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  64.5/120  53.8   3022     +55
  4 Houdini 3                      :  62.0/119  52.1   3013      +1
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  60.0/120  50.0   3000      -9
  6 Rybka 4.1                      :  48.0/117  41.0   2946     -40
  7 Junior 13                      :  48.5/120  40.4   2942     -73

Queensgambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/8/2pP4/8/PP2PPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 3[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  68.0/119  57.1   3043     +37
  2 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  65.0/119  54.6   3028     +61
  3 Houdini 3                      :  60.5/120  50.4   3003      -9
  4 Komodo 5                       :  60.0/120  50.0   3000      -5
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  59.0/120  49.2   2995     -14
  6 Junior 13                      :  54.5/120  45.4   2973     -42
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  50.0/116  43.1   2958     -28

Sicilian
[D]rnbqkb1r/pp2pppp/3p1n2/8/3NP3/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R b KQkq - 0 5[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Houdini 3                      :  69.5/119  58.4   3051     +39
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  64.5/119  54.2   3025     +19
  3 Komodo 5                       :  61.5/119  51.7   3010      +5
  4 Hiarcs 14                      :  62.0/120  51.7   3010      +1
  5 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  56.0/120  46.7   2980     +13
  6 Junior 13                      :  55.5/119  46.6   2980     -35
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  47.0/116  40.5   2942     -44

English
[D]r1bqk1nr/pp1p1pbp/2n3p1/2p1p3/2P1P3/2N3P1/PP1P1PBP/R1BQK1NR w KQkq - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  68.5/120  57.1   3043     +37
  2 Komodo 5                       :  68.0/120  56.7   3040     +35
  3 Houdini 3                      :  66.0/119  55.5   3033     +21
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  63.5/120  52.9   3018     +51
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  57.5/120  47.9   2988     -21
  6 Junior 13                      :  50.5/120  42.1   2953     -62
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  45.0/119  37.8   2926     -60

Caro-Kann
[D]rn1qkbnr/pp2pppp/2p5/3pPb2/3P4/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  72.0/119  60.5   3063     +57
  2 Komodo 5                       :  67.5/120  56.2   3037     +32
  3 Houdini 3                      :  58.5/119  49.2   2995     -17
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  56.5/118  47.9   2988     +21
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  57.0/120  47.5   2985     -24
  6 Junior 13                      :  55.0/120  45.8   2975     -40
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  49.5/116  42.7   2956     -30

Kings-Indian
[D]rnbq1rk1/ppp1ppbp/3p1np1/8/2PPP3/2N2N2/PP2BPPP/R1BQK2R b KQ - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  75.5/120  62.9   3079     +73
  2 Houdini 3                      :  68.0/120  56.7   3040     +28
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  67.5/120  56.2   3037     +70
  4 Komodo 5                       :  61.5/119  51.7   3011      +6
  5 Junior 13                      :  55.5/120  46.2   2978     -37 
  6 Hiarcs 14                      :  49.0/120  40.8   2945     -64
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  42.0/119  35.3   2910     -76

French Defence
[D]rnbqk1nr/ppp2ppp/4p3/3pP3/1b1P4/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQKBNR b KQ - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Houdini 3                      :  72.5/120  60.4   3063     +51
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  68.5/119  57.6   3046     +40
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  61.5/120  51.2   3007     +40
  4 Junior 13                      :  59.5/120  49.6   2997     -22
  5 Komodo 5                       :  57.5/120  47.9   2988     -17
  6 Hiarcs 14                      :  53.5/120  44.6   2968     -41
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  46.0/119  38.7   2931     -55

Spanish
[D]r1bqk2r/1pppbppp/p1n2n2/4p3/B3P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w kq - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  77.0/120  64.2   3087     +81
  2 Komodo 5                       :  64.5/120  53.8   3022     +17
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  62.5/118  53.0   3019     +52
  4 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.5/119  51.7   3011      +2
  5 Houdini 3                      :  59.5/119  50.0   3001     -11
  6 Junior 13                      :  52.0/120  43.3   2960     -55
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  39.0/116  33.6   2899     -87


Engines outperform and underperform significantly (with more than 50 Elo points or 2 standard deviations) as follows:

Houdini 3:
Outperforms: French Defence
Underperforms: None

Komodo 5:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: None

Critter 1.6:
Outperforms: Grunfeld, Caro-Kann, Kings-Indian, Spanish
Underperforms: None

Stockfish 2.3.1:
Outperforms: Grunfeld, Nimzo-Indian, Qeensgambit, English, Kings-Indian, Spanish
Underperforms: None

Rybka 4.1:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Grunfeld, English, Kings-Indian, French Defence, Spanish

Hiarcs 14:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Kings-Indian

Junior 13:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Grunfeld, Dutch - Staunton-Gambit, Nimzo-Indian, English, Spanish


Komodo, Houdini, Hiarcs have no preferences, Stockfish and Critter play better prefered openings, Rybka and Junior play badly without books.

Kai
Top
User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:27 pm

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Don »

That's a great test! Thanks for sharing it with us. I think a lot can be learned about chess programs in general by isolating style from strength.

Don
Laskos wrote:As an offshoot of the thread http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 8&start=70 I am posting here some results of 7 engines (Houdini 3, Komodo 5, Critter 1.6, Stockfish 2.3.1, Rybka 4.1, Hiarcs 14, Junior 13) for various, common opening positions 2-6 moves deep.

First, I adjusted time controls for each engine, so that they become pretty equal in strength. The time controls varied, from 60ms/move for Houdini to 600ms/move for Junior. The strength adjusted results using Frank Quisinsky 5,000+ opening 8 mover positions are:

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %       Elo    +   -    Draws

  1 Junior 13                      : 2428.5/4620  52.6   3015    9   9   27.5 %
  2 Houdini 3                      : 2407.5/4630  52.0   3012    8   8   36.1 %
  3 Hiarcs 14                      : 2386.5/4629  51.6   3009    9   9   27.4 %
  4 Critter 1.6                    : 2339.0/4590  51.0   3006    8   8   33.3 %
  5 Komodo 5                       : 2348.5/4622  50.8   3005    8   8   31.4 %
  6 Rybka 4.1                      : 2152.0/4523  47.6   2986    8   8   33.1 %
  7 Stockfish 2.3.1                : 2048.0/4606  44.5   2967    8   8   31.8 %
I then took 10 common openings from the CSS rating list of Klaus Wlotzka and using these 7 engines, I compared their scores with that obtained previously, when I used 5,000+ opening 8 mover positions. We can see if engines overperform or underperform in these short (2-6 moves) openings.

420 games for each opening, 120 games per engine, errors 2SD are 50-55 Elo points.


Grunfeld
[D]rnbqkb1r/ppp1pp1p/5np1/3p4/2PP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance  

  1 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  79.5/120  66.2   3100    +133  
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  71.5/120  59.6   3057     +51
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.0/119  51.3   3008      -1
  4 Houdini 3                      :  57.5/120  47.9   2987     -25
  5 Komodo 5                       :  56.5/120  47.1   2982     -23 
  6 Junior 13                      :  49.5/120  41.2   2947     -68
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  43.5/119  36.6   2918     -68


Dutch - Staunton-Gambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/ppppp1pp/8/5p2/3PP3/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR b KQkq - 0 2[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  70.5/120  58.8   3053     +47  
  2 Komodo 5                       :  69.5/120  57.9   3048     +43
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.5/120  51.2   3007      -2
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  60.5/119  50.8   3005     +38
  5 Houdini 3                      :  58.0/119  48.7   2992     -20
  6 Rybka 4.1                      :  51.5/120  42.9   2958     -28
  7 Junior 13                      :  47.5/120  39.6   2937     -78


Nimzo-Indian
[D]rnbqk2r/pppp1ppp/4pn2/8/1bPP4/2N5/PP2PPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  69.0/119  58.0   3048     +42
  2 Komodo 5                       :  65.0/119  54.6   3028     +23
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  64.5/120  53.8   3022     +55
  4 Houdini 3                      :  62.0/119  52.1   3013      +1
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  60.0/120  50.0   3000      -9
  6 Rybka 4.1                      :  48.0/117  41.0   2946     -40
  7 Junior 13                      :  48.5/120  40.4   2942     -73

Queensgambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/ppp1pppp/8/8/2pP4/8/PP2PPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 3[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  68.0/119  57.1   3043     +37
  2 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  65.0/119  54.6   3028     +61
  3 Houdini 3                      :  60.5/120  50.4   3003      -9
  4 Komodo 5                       :  60.0/120  50.0   3000      -5
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  59.0/120  49.2   2995     -14
  6 Junior 13                      :  54.5/120  45.4   2973     -42
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  50.0/116  43.1   2958     -28

Sicilian
[D]rnbqkb1r/pp2pppp/3p1n2/8/3NP3/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQKB1R b KQkq - 0 5[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Houdini 3                      :  69.5/119  58.4   3051     +39
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  64.5/119  54.2   3025     +19
  3 Komodo 5                       :  61.5/119  51.7   3010      +5
  4 Hiarcs 14                      :  62.0/120  51.7   3010      +1
  5 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  56.0/120  46.7   2980     +13
  6 Junior 13                      :  55.5/119  46.6   2980     -35
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  47.0/116  40.5   2942     -44

English
[D]r1bqk1nr/pp1p1pbp/2n3p1/2p1p3/2P1P3/2N3P1/PP1P1PBP/R1BQK1NR w KQkq - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  68.5/120  57.1   3043     +37
  2 Komodo 5                       :  68.0/120  56.7   3040     +35
  3 Houdini 3                      :  66.0/119  55.5   3033     +21
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  63.5/120  52.9   3018     +51
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  57.5/120  47.9   2988     -21
  6 Junior 13                      :  50.5/120  42.1   2953     -62
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  45.0/119  37.8   2926     -60

Caro-Kann
[D]rn1qkbnr/pp2pppp/2p5/3pPb2/3P4/8/PPP2PPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  72.0/119  60.5   3063     +57
  2 Komodo 5                       :  67.5/120  56.2   3037     +32
  3 Houdini 3                      :  58.5/119  49.2   2995     -17
  4 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  56.5/118  47.9   2988     +21
  5 Hiarcs 14                      :  57.0/120  47.5   2985     -24
  6 Junior 13                      :  55.0/120  45.8   2975     -40
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  49.5/116  42.7   2956     -30

Kings-Indian
[D]rnbq1rk1/ppp1ppbp/3p1np1/8/2PPP3/2N2N2/PP2BPPP/R1BQK2R b KQ - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  75.5/120  62.9   3079     +73
  2 Houdini 3                      :  68.0/120  56.7   3040     +28
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  67.5/120  56.2   3037     +70
  4 Komodo 5                       :  61.5/119  51.7   3011      +6
  5 Junior 13                      :  55.5/120  46.2   2978     -37 
  6 Hiarcs 14                      :  49.0/120  40.8   2945     -64
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  42.0/119  35.3   2910     -76

French Defence
[D]rnbqk1nr/ppp2ppp/4p3/3pP3/1b1P4/2N5/PPP2PPP/R1BQKBNR b KQ - 0 4[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance

  1 Houdini 3                      :  72.5/120  60.4   3063     +51
  2 Critter 1.6                    :  68.5/119  57.6   3046     +40
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  61.5/120  51.2   3007     +40
  4 Junior 13                      :  59.5/120  49.6   2997     -22
  5 Komodo 5                       :  57.5/120  47.9   2988     -17
  6 Hiarcs 14                      :  53.5/120  44.6   2968     -41
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  46.0/119  38.7   2931     -55

Spanish
[D]r1bqk2r/1pppbppp/p1n2n2/4p3/B3P3/5N2/PPPP1PPP/RNBQ1RK1 w kq - 0 6[/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo

  1 Critter 1.6                    :  77.0/120  64.2   3087     +81
  2 Komodo 5                       :  64.5/120  53.8   3022     +17
  3 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  62.5/118  53.0   3019     +52
  4 Hiarcs 14                      :  61.5/119  51.7   3011      +2
  5 Houdini 3                      :  59.5/119  50.0   3001     -11
  6 Junior 13                      :  52.0/120  43.3   2960     -55
  7 Rybka 4.1                      :  39.0/116  33.6   2899     -87


Engines outperform and underperform significantly (with more than 50 Elo points or 2 standard deviations) as follows:

Houdini 3:
Outperforms: French Defence
Underperforms: None

Komodo 5:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: None

Critter 1.6:
Outperforms: Grunfeld, Caro-Kann, Kings-Indian, Spanish
Underperforms: None

Stockfish 2.3.1:
Outperforms: Grunfeld, Nimzo-Indian, Qeensgambit, English, Kings-Indian, Spanish
Underperforms: None

Rybka 4.1:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Grunfeld, English, Kings-Indian, French Defence, Spanish

Hiarcs 14:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Kings-Indian

Junior 13:
Outperforms: None
Underperforms: Grunfeld, Dutch - Staunton-Gambit, Nimzo-Indian, English, Spanish


Komodo, Houdini, Hiarcs have no preferences, Stockfish and Critter play better prefered openings, Rybka and Junior play badly without books.

Kai
Capital punishment would be more effective as a preventive measure if it were administered prior to the crime.
Top
User avatar
Master Om
Posts: 449
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 10:57 am
Location: INDIA

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Master Om »

Great Post. You have save my day. But What about Kings Gambit ?
Always Expect the Unexpected
Top
Kohflote
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:07 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Kohflote »

Hi,

Firstly, thank you for the info and is definitely helpful.

Can you please clarify the elo and performance of each opening that you have given, does that mean is the elo and performance of the engine playing black?

What about Pirc Defence?

Best wishes,
Koh, Kah Huat
Top
User avatar
Laskos
Posts: 10948
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
Full name: Kai Laskos

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Laskos »

Master Om wrote:Great Post. You have save my day. But What about Kings Gambit ?
I included King's Gambit Accepted, although it's not very often played at high level.

Kingsgambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/pppp1ppp/8/8/4Pp2/8/PPPP2PP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 3 [/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance   

  1 Rybka 4.1                      :  65.0/115  56.5   3040     +54
  2 Houdini 3                      :  63.5/118  53.8   3023     +11
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  62.5/119  52.5   3015      +6
  4 Junior 13                      :  62.0/119  52.1   3013      -2
  5 Critter 1.6                    :  59.5/119  50.0   3000      -6
  6 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  52.5/120  43.8   2963      -4
  7 Komodo 5                       :  49.0/118  41.5   2949     -56

Rybka overperfroms, Komodo underperforms, the rest are within error margins.
Top
User avatar
Laskos
Posts: 10948
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 10:21 pm
Full name: Kai Laskos

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Laskos »

Kohflote wrote:Hi,

Firstly, thank you for the info and is definitely helpful.

Can you please clarify the elo and performance of each opening that you have given, does that mean is the elo and performance of the engine playing black?

What about Pirc Defence?

Best wishes,
Koh, Kah Huat
The performances for selected openings are compared with the base performance in 16,000+ games of adjusted for strength engines given in the first table. The engines use different time controls, so that their strength is comparable. These 16,000+ games were played using 5,000+ PGN opening 8-move positions by Frank Quisinsky, they are pretty balanced, and not too deep, similar to a generic book. Each of the selected openings is played by all engines with both white and black, so the performances of engines are combined white/black performances for each opening.

I will post the results for Pirc Defence soon.

Kai
Top
User avatar
Master Om
Posts: 449
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2010 10:57 am
Location: INDIA

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Master Om »

Laskos wrote:
Master Om wrote:Great Post. You have save my day. But What about Kings Gambit ?
I included King's Gambit Accepted, although it's not very often played at high level.

Kingsgambit
[D]rnbqkbnr/pppp1ppp/8/8/4Pp2/8/PPPP2PP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 3 [/D]

Code: Select all

    Program                            Score     %     Elo   Performance   

  1 Rybka 4.1                      :  65.0/115  56.5   3040     +54
  2 Houdini 3                      :  63.5/118  53.8   3023     +11
  3 Hiarcs 14                      :  62.5/119  52.5   3015      +6
  4 Junior 13                      :  62.0/119  52.1   3013      -2
  5 Critter 1.6                    :  59.5/119  50.0   3000      -6
  6 Stockfish 2.3.1                :  52.5/120  43.8   2963      -4
  7 Komodo 5                       :  49.0/118  41.5   2949     -56

Rybka overperfroms, Komodo underperforms, the rest are within error margins.

Thank you thank you and thank you. By this now I am sure That Rybka still has bite when it comes to Intuitive play with Initiative and development. Interestingly Its bad in all other openings but overperforms
Always Expect the Unexpected
Top
Kohflote
Posts: 219
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 11:07 am
Location: Singapore

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Kohflote »

Thank you! Your effort and help is much appreciated.

Best wishes,
Koh, Kah Huat
Top
Vinvin
Posts: 5228
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 9:40 am
Full name: Vincent Lejeune

Re: Engines performance for selected openings

Post by Vinvin »

Laskos wrote:...
I will post the results for Pirc Defence soon.Kai
May be you can add : Four knights, Scotch and Italian opening too :)
Top
User avatar
Ajedrecista
Posts: 1966
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:04 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain.

Re: Engines performance for selected openings.

Post by Ajedrecista »

Hello:
Vinvin wrote:
Laskos wrote:...
I will post the results for Pirc Defence soon.Kai
May be you can add : Four knights, Scotch and Italian opening too :)
It is very nice but it can become into a huge snowball. There are lots of very playable openings that Kai has not tested yet, and the effort is incredible:
  • · Slav/Semi-Slav Defences.
    · Queen's Gambit Declined.
    · Queen's Indian Defence.
    · Catalan Opening.
    · Petrov Defence.
And many others... What about variants inside the main openings? I mean: Spanish-Zaitsev, Spanish-Breyer, Spanish-Chigorin, Spanish-Marshall Gambit; QGD-Classical/Capablanca, QGD-Lasker, QGD-Tartakower; ...

I fear that this effort is unaffordable. At least it would be nice to test the openings/defences I suggested because many of them have a great importance in modern World Chess Championships (especially Slav/Semi-Slav Defences and Catalan Opening).

By the way, thank you very much for your dedication, Kai!

Regards from Spain.

Ajedrecista.
Top

Return to “Computer Chess Club: General Topics”