Rybka (without Nb1) vs FM Meyer (ELO 2280) 0-3 (PGN)!

[M ANSARI]

The handicap shown is too much ... I also had no problem winning with that handicap. Rybka will repeat moves and so it is quite predictable once you know the "trick". Basically Rybka knows it is lost and is just trying to fight to equalize and the other side just has to make as few mistakes as possible. I think Rybka can be designed to play much better in such handicaps but what purpose would that serve. Nothing is more humiliating than losing with such odds ... please preserve some dignity for humans.

[playjunior]

FM Meyer wins this Match against Rybka (playing on a 8 core machine).

He leads after 3 (from 4 games) 3-0!!!

Thanks!

It's a completely logical result.
There is a limit on the handicap you can give. A Knight is just too much.
A good player with a Knight more, should be able to win against any top Grandmaster and any top engine.....

Yes. When the Rybka with a pawn handicap matches were made, Larry Kaufman had stated that a pawn was worth about 300-400 elo, so imagine a whole knight.

Albert

1. I disagree that a pawn was worth 300-400 elo. There are openings like morra gambit, Benko gambit etc where you had to give away a pawn in compensation for a very slight position advantage/rapid development.

2. If it was the pawn in f file , then it could be worth 200 - 300 elo at Rybka's level, but this is not the case with the pawn on other files a7,d7 etc

3. CCRL's estimation for Rybka is 3129(this was Rybka on a 4 core, the processor used in a match was 8, so that adds up few more), So even by Larry's statement and estimation based on 4 core, knight is about 900 elo points.
So, 3129 - 900 = 2229, which is not bad at all, Rybka should be able to get atleast few win or a draw.
It's like a 2229(*) vs 2280. * on 4 core. on 8 cores, it is about Equal.

It's either Larry's estimation for a pawn is wrong or Rybka needs more knowledge on how to play when handicapped.

Larry brings a very nice argumentation about how to calculate how much ELO a pawn is worth in his famous article about material imbalances. Seemed perfectly plausible to me.
Piece=3.5 pawns is an average value. It is worth more in the opening and middlegame, and less in the endgame.
Rybka's 3129 rating is synthetic. It has nothing to do with human FIDE ratings.
And, a final note-Morra, Benko, Evans, King's gambit-they all do not offer a full pawn worth compensation. Some offer close to reasonable (Benko, maybe Evans) odds, and King's gambit and Morra are kind of suicide on the highest level.

[Cubeman]

Don't forget that these were generous time controls for the Human.It just shows that the main handicap that the Human gives the computer is of a time nature.

[Uri]

CCRL's estimation for Rybka is 3129(this was Rybka on a 4 core, the processor used in a match was 8, so that adds up few more), So even by Larry's statement and estimation based on 4 core, knight is about 900 elo points.
So, 3129 - 900 = 2229, which is not bad at all, Rybka should be able to get atleast few win or a draw.
It's like a 2229(*) vs 2280. * on 4 core. on 8 cores, it is about Equal.

It's either Larry's estimation for a pawn is wrong or Rybka needs more knowledge on how to play when handicapped.

Kasparov (which is the best player in the world) is 2812 so Rybka can't be 3129 elo. I think Rybka's real elo is about 2720 Fide.

[Mike S.]

CCRL ratings are not FIDE Elo ratings anyway. These are different scales. Strength testing is not like using a measuring tape. The numbers level of a computer rating list a arbitrary (like for example 0...1200 instead of 2000...3200).

Nevertheless, your argument with Kasparov makes no sense either. Rykba (and some other good engines) are stronger than Kasparov.

Btw. Kasparov has (1) lost his title match against Kramnik (2) has retired from professional chess and (3) is now a russian politician. Of course he remains a great player - of chess history.

[George Tsavdaris]

I think Rybka's real elo is about 2720 Fide.

Really? How come?

I think it's about 2920± 50 ELO.

Kasparov (which is the best player in the world) is 2812 so Rybka can't be 3129 elo.

This 3129 ELO(if it stands true to human games also) means that if Rybka played a 24 game match against the best Kasparov ever that had 2851 ELO points, then the result would be something like:
Rybka - Kasparov +16 =8 -0 OR
Rybka - Kasparov +17 =6 -1 etc....

And any score that has Rybka with less than 16 wins, can't occur, since it will end with an ELO difference less than the 3129-2851 for Rybka-Kasparov. In other words:
Rybka has to win at least 16 games(against the best Kasparov ever) in a 24 game match, in order to justify its rating!

Although i believe Rybka is stronger than 2900 ELO i don't see how the above results can happen. They can't! We are not there yet.....

But i guess Larry.K has never said Rybka on that octal is 3129 ELO against humans. But only against the conditions of CCRL.
Against humans i will repeat, i guess it is around 2920±50 with + being more probable.....

[Albert Silver]

Yes. When the Rybka with a pawn handicap matches were made, Larry Kaufman had stated that a pawn was worth about 300-400 elo, so imagine a whole knight.

Albert

1. I disagree that a pawn was worth 300-400 elo. There are openings like morra gambit, Benko gambit etc where you had to give away a pawn in compensation for a very slight position advantage/rapid development.

He wasn't referring to a situation where a pawn is sacced for compensation.

3. CCRL's estimation for Rybka is 3129 (this was Rybka on a 4 core, the processor used in a match was 8, so that adds up few more).

CCRL doesn't issue FIDE ratings. Elo is a system of relative ratings, not absolute numbers, and it only describes performance between the players in its universe.

For example, suppose both you and I were runners in the 100m dash. I could run it in 10 seconds, and you could run it in 9 seconds. Elo wouldn't describe it that way, the rating would merely say that you were 1 second faster than me.

If we were the only players in a chess rating and you were 200 Elo more, it wouldn't matter if you were rated 2000 and I was rated 1800, or if you were rated 3000 and I was rated 2800, since they would mean exactly the same thing: you are rated 200 Elo more. 200 Elo more means that you win 75% of the games against the player rated 200 less, that's all. If you now take a player from a different rating list, who hasn't played against you or me, and tell me it is rated 400 Elo more than its opponents, that information alone won't say how it would do against us.

To know how Rybka on 8 cores would do against a top human, you'd have to play it against human players.

On a personal note, I think that it would probably be somewhere between 2850-2900 FIDE.

Albert

[Kurt Utzinger]

Below are the PGN's of the 3 games I have played:
Kurt

[Event "Blitz:30'+30""]
[Site "Switzerland"]
[Date "2008.06.07"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit"]
[Black "Utzinger, Kurt"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[PlyCount "139"]

1. Nc3 Nf6 2. Nd5 Nxd5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 Ng8 5. e4 d5 6. e5 Bf5 7. Nf3 Bg4 8.
c3 Bxf3 9. Qxf3 e6 10. Bb5+ Nd7 11. d4 Ne7 12. O-O a6 13. Bd3 c5 14. Be3 Nc6
15. a3 cxd4 16. cxd4 f5 17. Rfc1 Be7 18. Qh5+ g6 19. Qh6 Bf8 20. Qh3 Bg7 21. b4
O-O 22. f4 Rc8 23. Rab1 b5 24. a4 Qb6 25. a5 Qd8 26. Bf2 Qe7 27. Bh4 Qf7 28.
Qe3 Rfe8 29. Be1 Bf8 30. Qf2 Be7 31. Qb2 Qf8 32. Bd2 Na7 33. Rf1 Rc4 34. Bc3
Rb8 35. Qd2 Nc6 36. Bxc4 bxc4 37. Kf2 Bxb4 38. Bxb4 Nxb4 39. Qc3 Nd3+ 40. Kg1
Rxb1 41. Rxb1 Nxf4 42. Qe3 Nd3 43. h4 Qd8 44. Rb7 Qc8 45. Rb1 Qc7 46. g3 Qa7
47. h5 N7xe5 48. hxg6 hxg6 49. Kg2 c3 50. Rf1 c2 51. Rh1 c1=Q 52. Rxc1 Nxc1 53.
Qxe5 Qd7 54. g4 Nd3 55. Qg3 Qb5 56. gxf5 Qb2+ 57. Kf3 Qf2+ 58. Qxf2 Nxf2 59.
fxe6 Kf8 60. Kxf2 Ke7 61. Kf3 Kxe6 62. Kg4 Kf6 63. Kf4 g5+ 64. Kg4 Kg6 65. Kf3
Kf5 66. Ke3 g4 67. Kd3 Kf4 68. Kd2 Ke4 69. Kc2 Kxd4 70. Kd2 0-1

[Event "Blitz:30'+30""]
[Site "Switzerland"]
[Date "2008.06.08"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit"]
[Black "Utzinger, Kurt"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[PlyCount "116"]

1. Nc3 Nf6 2. Nd5 Nxd5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1 Ng8 5. e4 e5 6. Nf3 Nc6 7. Bb5 a6 8.
Bxc6 dxc6 9. O-O Bg4 10. h3 h5 11. Re1 Qf6 12. Re3 Bc5 13. Rc3 Bd4 14. Ra3
O-O-O 15. Qe2 Bxf3 16. Rxf3 Qe6 17. d3 Ne7 18. c3 Bb6 19. a4 Ng6 20. a5 Ba7 21.
Ra3 c5 22. Ra4 Rd6 23. c4 Rhd8 24. Ra3 Ne7 25. Rg3 g6 26. h4 Nc6 27. Bg5 R8d7
28. Kf1 Nd4 29. Qd2 Bb8 30. Be3 c6 31. Qc1 Bc7 32. Bxd4 Rxd4 33. Qh6 Bd8 34.
Kg1 Bxh4 35. Rf3 Bf6 36. Qe3 Qe7 37. Qe2 Bg5 38. Rh3 Qd8 39. Kh1 Bf4 40. g4 h4
41. Qf3 Bg5 42. Qe2 Qf6 43. Ra1 Qf4 44. Rd1 Bd8 45. b3 f5 46. gxf5 gxf5 47. Rf3
Qg4 48. Rg1 Qh5 49. Rg8 Rf7 50. exf5 Rxf5 51. Re3 Qxe2 52. Rxe2 Rxd3 53. Rh8
Kd7 54. Rh7+ Be7 55. Rb2 Ke6 56. Kg1 Rff3 57. Rh5 h3 58. Re2 Bd6 0-1

[Event "Blitz:30'+30""]
[Site "Switzerland"]
[Date "2008.06.08"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Rybka 2.3.2a mp 32-bit"]
[Black "Utzinger, Kurt"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "A00"]
[Annotator "Utzinger,Kurt"]
[PlyCount "172"]
[TimeControl "1800+30"]

{256MB, Rybka2.ctg, Intel Quad Q6600} 1. Nc3 Nf6 2. Nd5 Nxd5 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Ng1
Ng8 5. e4 {-1.72/18 112} e5 {28} 6. Nf3 {-1.78/17 98} Nf6 {(d5) 23} 7. Nxe5 {
-1.70/17 77} d6 {(d5) 13} 8. Nf3 {-1.79/17 75} Nxe4 {4} 9. Bb5+ {-1.85/17 81}
c6 {27} 10. Be2 {-1.96/18 64} Be7 {13} 11. c3 {-2.03/18 136} Be6 {(0-0) 39} 12.
Nd4 {-1.85/17 115} O-O {(Ld7) 18} 13. Nxe6 {-1.75/18 100} fxe6 {13} 14. O-O {
-1.87/19 293} Qb6 {134} 15. Bf3 {-1.86/20 113} Ng5 {(Sf6) 156} 16. Bg4 {
-1.66/16 15} e5 {(Sa6) 23} 17. d3 {-1.60/17 95} Na6 {43} 18. Be3 {-1.61/16 13}
Qc7 {(c5) 89} 19. Qd2 {-1.63/15 77} Nf7 {28} 20. Rae1 {-1.71/16 70} d5 {30} 21.
a3 {-1.78/16 45} Bc5 {(Sc5) 48} 22. d4 {-1.72/15 18} exd4 {(Ld6) 11} 23. cxd4 {
-1.65/15 12} Bd6 {12} 24. g3 {-1.70/15 2} Rae8 {(Sb8) 22} 25. Re2 {-1.87/16 211
} Nb8 {27} 26. Rfe1 {-1.89/17 35} Nd7 {30} 27. Bf5 {-2.00/18 139} Nf6 {10} 28.
Qd1 {-2.12/18 39} Re7 {(Se4) 57} 29. Kg2 {-2.10/16 61} Rfe8 {4} 30. Bd3 {
-2.26/17 131} Ng4 {25} 31. Bd2 {-2.28/17 21} Rxe2 {11} 32. Bxe2 {-2.37/18 31}
Nf6 {11} 33. Qc2 {-2.52/17 54} Re4 {(b6) 248} 34. Be3 {-2.38/16 56} Qb6 {
(Dd7) 82} 35. Bd3 {-2.20/16 34} Re7 {(Te8) 56} 36. f3 {-2.28/15 53} Qd8 {
(Lc7) 23} 37. Re2 {-2.26/16 44} Qe8 {6} 38. Qc1 {-2.33/15 17} Bc7 {(Sg5) 12}
39. b3 {-2.44/17 35} Bb6 {(c5) 15} 40. Kf1 {-2.52/16 40} Nd6 {35} 41. Bf2 {
-2.59/18 24} Rxe2 {5} 42. Bxe2 {-2.73/18 6} Nf5 {(Sd7) 49} 43. Qf4 {-2.41/18 53
} Qd7 {(Sh6) 56} 44. Bd3 {-2.39/18 52} Nd6 {(Se7) 46} 45. a4 {-2.46/17 50} Bc7
{41} 46. Qe3 {-2.56/17 17} Qe8 {(g6) 19} 47. Qd2 {-2.47/17 65} Qe6 {(Df8) 14}
48. Kg1 {-2.53/16 65} b5 {(g6) 84} 49. Qc3 {-2.21/16 35} Qd7 {31} 50. Kg2 {
-2.24/17 0} bxa4 {17} 51. bxa4 {-2.30/19 62} Nb7 {(Kf7) 54} 52. Qc2 {
-2.44/17 36} Bb6 {(Sa5) 35} 53. Bf5 {-2.43/17 52} Qe8 {20} 54. Bd3 {-2.52/19 33
} Na5 {29} 55. g4 {-2.66/18 35} h6 {(g6) 46} 56. Bg6 {-2.48/16 32} Qe7 {
(De6) 36} 57. h3 {-2.73/16 35} Nc4 {3} 58. Kg1 {-2.85/15 47} Bc7 {74} 59. Qf5 {
-3.12/18 0} Qd7 {48} 60. Qxd7 {-3.33/20 9} Nxd7 {3} 61. Be8 {-3.55/20 18} Nb8 {
25} 62. Bg6 {-3.78/20 3} Nb2 {108} 63. Bc2 {-4.04/21 0} Nd7 {12} 64. Bf5 {
-4.07/21 46} Nb8 {(Sf8) 40} 65. Bc2 {0.00/30 10} Kf7 {(Sxa4) 17} 66. Be1 {
-3.75/20 33} Nd7 {15} 67. a5 {-3.92/20 16} Nc4 {27} 68. Kf2 {-4.96/20 58} Bxa5
{32} 69. Ba4 {-5.13/20 25} Bxe1+ {13} 70. Kxe1 {-5.14/20 25} Nb8 {(Sa5) 23} 71.
Ke2 {-5.17/19 57} Ke6 {(a5) 34} 72. f4 {-5.12/20 78} Kd6 {(a5) 18} 73. Bb3 {
-5.09/18 67} a5 {(Sd7) 24} 74. Kd3 {-5.41/17 40} Nb6 {66} 75. g5 {-5.40/18 0}
hxg5 {8} 76. fxg5 {-5.60/17 1} N8d7 {(Sa6) 7} 77. h4 {-5.55/19 70} c5 {(a4) 21}
78. Bc2 {-5.41/18 39} c4+ {(cxd4) 36} 79. Kc3 {-5.00/21 59} Ke6 {(Sa8) 32} 80.
Bh7 {-5.63/17 35} Nf8 {6} 81. Bb1 {-5.91/18 43} g6 {10} 82. Bc2 {-6.37/19 22}
Kf7 {(Sc8) 7} 83. Bd1 {-6.51/18 50} Ne6 {8} 84. Bc2 {-6.80/16 22} Nf4 {(Sc8) 13
} 85. Bd1 {-6.97/16 35} Ne6 {(Sc8) 36} 86. Bc2 {0.00/37 7} Ng7 {(Sc8) 4} 0-1

[Uri]

It's hard to tell Rybka's real strength because it doesn't play against humans in Fide, it only plays against other engines.

Still it would be interesting to see how Rybka will perform against top humans such as Kramnik, Anand or Carlsen.