Since I don't have saved copies of these lists, and I don't know if histories of said exist for perusal anywhere else, I have to use archive.org. Using the standard 40/40 list from CCRL, starting May of 2007, or about the time that Rybka took its place at the top of the chess program world, and taking selected engines, e.g. the best of each variety that were around both then and now:
Code: Select all
5-21-2007
Rybka 2.3.1 3078
Zap Zanzibar 3021
Hiarcs 11.1 2993
D Shred 10 2945
Deep Fritz 10 2943
Naum 2.1 2937
Toga II 1.3 2875
Glarung 1.2.1 2859
Spike 1.2 2827
Bright 0.1d 2739
Crafty 20.14 2713
Now fast forward to today
Code: Select all
11-26-2010
Rybka 4 3264
Stockfish 1.9.1 3222
Naum 4.2 3184
D Shred 12 3127
Deep Fritz 11 3096
Zappa Mex II 3075
Hiarcs 12.1 3010
Toga II 3008
Bright 0.4 3002
Crafty 23.3 2946
Spike 1.2 2849
This is the improvement over the past 3 years and 6 months for each:
Code: Select all
D Rybka 186
Stkfsh/Glrng 363
Naum 247
Shredder 182
Fritz 153
Zappa 54
Hiarcs 17
Toga II 133
Bright 263
Crafty 233
Spike 22
Using good-old Spike 1.2 Turin (which hasn't been developed since 2005) as the benchmark, we can conclude (right or wrong) that there hasn't been much, if any, artificial inflation in the ratings in the 3.5 years. Whatever ELO improvement there is has been made due to improvements in the technology, design, etc.
The question I have is this:
HOW can anybody in their right mind say that the last 200/300/whatever ELO has been the exclusive property of Mr. Rajlich and Rybka 3->4? .
Since Rybka is closed-source (or whatever the correct term is), they certainly couldn't all have decompiled his program and used his ideas, such as they are. They must have had their own ideas or used/modified freely-available code/ideas of others.
As for the ELO increases, Stockfish (which is a fork of Glarung) went up almost twice as much. Naum, Bright, and Crafy went up about 1.3 times as much, Shredder about the same, Fritz a bit less, Toga a bit less than that. Only Zappa and Hiarcs didn't keep pace, and of course, we can't expect an engine (Spike) that is exactly the same at both points in time to improve, especially since it was included as a benchmark against artificial inflation.
Apparently, a lot of the leading legal engines improved as much or more than Rybka has by mainly fair means. I'm sure that most programmers looked at the various open-source code of others, plus whatever they could glean from conversations, forum posts, emails, etc., took advantage of whatever new technologies were available, and improved their engines by these means. Since Mr. Rajlich doesn't live in a vacuum (as there IS some air, albeit rarified, up there on that high-cloud perch), he probably did that same.
What am I missing here? Why is Mr. Rajlich the way, truth, and the light, and all others pale before him?
PS: I wouldn't doubt it if Stockfish overtook Rybka before the next version of the latter is produced, supposedly in the fall of 2011. I also wouldn't be surprised, if Stockfish does whiz by Rybka , that Rybka updates/versions start cranking out a lot faster than they used to. Without the 100 ELO cushion----indeed if not even number one, and with no way to pressure the ratings lists people to exclude Stockfish, Mr. Rajlich may feel more compelled to improve his product (faster), so that he can possibly stay on top of the engine list, and thus give the public a reason to buy his product.
Any odds on Mr. Rajlich incorporating some of the ideas from Stockfish into Rybka 5?
This production is being brought to you by Rybka: "The engine made from scratch.™"