Why no thinker talk?

[Tony Thomas]

I was so surprised to see the results of the new Thinker. It is so strong that it is the strongest non-rybka, fruitka, free chess engine on my rating list. It is showing an improvement of almost 200 points after 127 games. Provided that it gains from 64bit, it has a real shot at being the top free engine with few minor tweaks. I am surprised that no one is raving about this engine, I noticed that there is a 4 page thread about Junior, but nothing about an engine that's almost as strong and free at the same time. It's even rated 3 points ahead of Toga 1.4beta 5c, welcome to the world of thinker.

Another thing worth mentioning is that the previous version of Thinker used own book, were as the new version used Ipapyrus.abk from Wael Deeb.

Code: Select all

rank Name                           Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Naum 3                        2926   58   54   141   80%  2695   26% 
   2 Hiarcs11.2SPUCI               2896   54   51   162   74%  2702   17% 
   3 Shredder11UCI                 2845   47   45   187   69%  2702   20% 
   4 fruit 2.3                     2839   45   43   203   69%  2698   24% 
   5 Rybka v1.0 Beta.w32           2835   39   37   258   69%  2697   26% 
   6 Thinker 5.1c(Passive)         2823   56   54   127   66%  2703   24%

For comparison, here is the rating of the previous version.

Code: Select all

Thinker 4.7a                  2628   39   39   242   40%  2699   23% 

[Werner]

Hi Tony,
Thinker active was tested for CEGT 40/20. Results later in our lists as usual )

[Tony Thomas]

Hi Tony,
Thinker active was tested for CEGT 40/20. Results later in our lists as usual )

Lance recommends testing Thinker passive in eng vs eng matches. I personally tested both, and there is a 100 point difference in my time controls.

[Werner]

Hi Ray,
we have
152 (active) Thinker 5.1c x64 2710
new in our 40/20 list!

I´ll try the other version later - but 100 elos more ??

If this is true, why release the other version

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi Ray,
we have
152 (active) Thinker 5.1c x64 2710
new in our 40/20 list!

I´ll try the other version later - but 100 elos more ??

If this is true, why release the other version

The active version is intended to play against humans,it plays more tactical shots but will play much weaker against other chess engines.....
Thinker Passive is the one to be tested against other chess engines.....

[GenoM]

I am surprised that no one is raving about this engine, I noticed that there is a 4 page thread about Junior, but nothing about an engine that's almost as strong and free at the same time.

May be noone has the same results as you?

[Tony Thomas]

I am surprised that no one is raving about this engine, I noticed that there is a 4 page thread about Junior, but nothing about an engine that's almost as strong and free at the same time.

May be noone has the same results as you?

I dont see why not? The engine is a clear improvement, and as I can see CEGT tested the weaker version.

[Tony Thomas]

Hi Ray,
we have
152 (active) Thinker 5.1c x64 2710
new in our 40/20 list!

I´ll try the other version later - but 100 elos more ??

If this is true, why release the other version

I doubt that you will get 100 points on top of the 150 or so improvement your list shows. I guess it was more of statistical noise from my side, it isnt redundant to expect another 50 though. I see that you tested the 64 bit version of Thinker were as I tested the 32bit.

[Ryan Benitez]

Maybe Thinker is not interesting to the people of CCC because it is not a clone of something else? Junior is interesting because it is the first UCI version but that interest will soon fade. A thread about Strelka however would be 12 pages within days. This is defiantly not the same CCC that I stumbled upon 7 years ago when I was getting interested in computer chess. I am happy that some people at least enjoy the new direction.

[Tony Thomas]

Maybe Thinker is not interesting to the people of CCC because it is not a clone of something else? Junior is interesting because it is the first UCI version but that interest will soon fade. A thread about Strelka however would be 12 pages within days. This is defiantly not the same CCC that I stumbled upon 7 years ago when I was getting interested in computer chess. I am happy that some people at least enjoy the new direction.

We can turn this in to yet another Strelka thread. What is your stand on the whole Strelka affair? Is strelka worth my computer time?