Testing LazySMP

[LazySMP]

I’m out of here. Good bye

[LazySMP]

KasparovChess is a registered commercial brandname - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kasparov_Chess

Daniel, future posts with the name KasparovChess will be deleted and will result in a ban.

OK... I continue to develop LazySMP, but LazySMP algorithm has been removed from it.

Changes of 9.0 compared to 8.0:

• Remove LazySMP Algorithm

• Add Quiescence Search

• Improve Evaluation For Pawns, Mobility and King safety

• Fix Some UCI Bugs

Download link: https://www.filemail.com/d/uvmgygarfkcwiiv
[pgn]
[Event Blitz 5.0min"]
[Date "2024.12.31"]
[White "Fruit 2.1"]
[Black "LazySMP Version 9.0"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C42"]
[PlyCount "122"]

1. e4 {0.16/14 20 Both last book move} e5 {0.20/16 4}
2. Nf3 {0.19/12 9 (Nc3)} Nf6 {0.18/16 6} 3. Nxe5 {0.26/12 9} Qe7 {0.25/16 5} 4.
Nf3 {0.49/13 14 (d4)} Nxe4 {0.42/16 3 (Qxe4+)} 5. Be2 {0.68/13 8} d5 {0.36/17
3 (Qd8)} 6. O-O {0.54/13 10 (d3)} Nc6 {0.34/17 5} 7. Re1 {0.60/13 15 (Bb5)} Be6
{0.38/17 7} 8. d3 {0.58/13 7 (Bb5)} Nd6 {0.27/17 4 (Nf6)} 9. Nc3 {0.41/13 23
(d4)} d4 {0.21/17 4 (0-0-0)} 10. Na4 {0.55/12 4 (Ne4)} Nf5 {0.22/16 5 (h6)} 11.
Ng5 {0.65/12 4 (c4)} Ne3 {0.00/18 7 (0-0-0)} 12. fxe3 {0.70/13 4} Qxg5 {
0.00/19 4} 13. exd4 {0.61/12 5} Qh4 {0.00/18 4} 14. Bh5 {0.23/12 15 (d5)} Qxd4+
{-0.21/17 3} 15. Kh1 {0.09/13 5} g6 {-0.24/19 5 (0-0-0)} 16. Re4 {0.28/12 5}
Qd7 {-0.30/19 8} 17. Bf3 {0.15/12 4} O-O-O {-0.32/17 6} 18. Be3 {0.20/11 3
(Nc3)} f5 {-0.48/17 3 (Kb8)} 19. Rh4 {0.06/11 4} Be7 {-0.55/18 5 (Re8)} 20. Nc5
{-0.13/12 5} Bxc5 {-0.62/18 3} 21. Bxc5 {-0.15/11 2} Bd5 {-0.58/16 3} 22. a4 {
-0.23/11 4 (Be3)} g5 {-0.85/16 4 (Qg7)} 23. Rh5 {-0.39/12 4} h6 {-0.93/16 4}
24. Bxd5 {-0.51/11 2} Qxd5 {-0.89/16 3} 25. Bf2 {-0.64/12 4} f4 {-0.93/16 12
(Qe5)} 26. Rh3 {-0.56/11 6 (a5)} Kb8 {-0.97/16 3 (Qe5)} 27. a5 {-0.67/10 2 (d4)
} a6 {-1.25/17 4} 28. c4 {-0.86/11 5 (Ra4)} Qe6 {-1.47/16 6 (Qe5)} 29. b3 {
-0.86/11 3} g4 {-1.46/18 5 (Qe5)} 30. Rh4 {-1.06/12 2} h5 {-1.68/17 5 (Rhg8)}
31. d4 {-1.51/12 6} Qf5 {-1.52/16 5 (Qf6)} 32. d5 {-1.18/11 3} f3 {-2.02/16 4
(Qf6)} 33. g3 {-1.26/12 5} Kc8 {-2.22/17 10 (Ne5)} 34. h3 {-1.46/11 2 (Qd2)}
Ne5 {-2.20/15 3} 35. Bd4 {-1.61/10 2} f2 {-3.16/17 6} 36. Qe2 {-1.98/11 2} Nf3
{-3.87/16 4 (Rde8)} 37. hxg4 {-1.29/11 1} Nxd4 {-4.02/19 2} 38. gxf5 {-2.52/15
2} Nxe2 {-4.02/20 3} 39. Kg2 {-2.85/15 2 (Kh2)} Rhg8 {-4.10/19 2} 40. Kxf2 {
-2.99/15 3} Nxg3 {-4.02/18 2} 41. Rf4 {-3.00/14 2 (Rg1)} Rdf8 {-4.16/19 3} 42.
f6 {-3.12/14 2} Rxf6 {-4.35/18 4} 43. Rxf6 {-3.14/13 2} Ne4+ {-4.28/17 3} 44.
Ke2 {-3.22/14 2} Nxf6 {-4.25/17 2} 45. Rf1 {-3.33/13 2} Re8+ {-4.32/19 11
(Rg2+)} 46. Kd3 {-3.39/14 2 (Kd1)} Ng4 {-4.32/17 2} 47. Rf4 {-3.57/14 2} Rg8 {
-4.26/17 2} 48. Kd4 {-3.88/15 3} h4 {-5.18/20 2} 49. Rf3 {-3.99/15 1} Rh8 {
-5.28/23 2} 50. Rh3 {-4.20/16 1} Nf2 {-5.28/21 2} 51. Rf3 {-4.37/15 1} h3 {
-5.28/21 2} 52. Rxf2 {-4.77/15 1} h2 {-5.29/19 1} 53. Rf1 {-4.82/15 1 (Rxh2)}
h1=Q {-5.68/20 3 (Rh4+)} 54. Rxh1 {-4.77/11 0} Rxh1 {-5.68/18 2} 55. Kc3 {
-4.98/13 1 (Kd3)} Ra1 {-6.02/17 2 (Kd7)} 56. Kc2 {-5.24/14 1 (Kb2)} Rxa5 {
-6.06/17 1} 57. Kb2 {-5.60/14 1} b5 {-6.34/16 1 (Kd7)} 58. Kc2 {-6.22/13 1
(Kc3)} bxc4 {-7.10/18 2} 59. bxc4 {-7.18/14 1} Ra3 {-7.41/17 2 (Kd7)} 60. Kb2 {
-7.21/14 1 (Kd2)} Rf3 {-8.07/17 4 (Rh3)} 61. Ka2 {-7.57/14 1 (Kc2)} Rc3 {
-8.14/16 2 (Kd7)} 0-1[/pgn]

If you can eventually reach 2400, I'll be happy to include it in my Amateur Series.

I humbly request Graham to test my engine, which has a rating > 2500 ELO.

[Daniel Anulliero]

You can always rename it KarpovChess , or CapaChess or YouMustWantToTestEngineChess

[LazySMP]

You can always rename it KarpovChess , or CapaChess or YouMustWantToTestEngineChess

Yes, but I don't want that to be another excuse for Graham not to test my engine.
viewtopic.php?p=974666#p974666

[jefk]

so back again ?

while i didn't follow *this* soap (the election procedures are enough for me)
many of the critical feedback you received imo looked quite reasonable
(although some here can be occasionally mean as well, i know); so i'm
not going to repeat it (unless part of it in other words maybe).

Tip(s) for you
(being just one of hundreds of other engine programmers):

1) being honest about yourself might help, while there is a physicist
from Stanford with name DP, there's no known computer scientist.
From the style of writing/reasoning etc, i presume you're just some young
student (maybe IT studies, or similar); if you would be simply modest about
that, you probably wouldn't be personally attacked/ridiculed anymore
2) in addition i would explain some goals/purposes and specific
traits of your engine; you may have seen another recent thread where
people ask for low-Elo rated engines playing in human style (preferably
with a Uci-limit strength option and taking a reasonable amount of time
per move instead of playing instantly); also the purpose of Patricia is clear,
not so for your engine unless i missed some stuff; it also may be to learn
about programming, or computer chess, or otherwise, imo no harm in
simply stating that, instead of eg. using silly avatars
3) most of the testing you can do yourself, eg. on a second comp,
and if you would do as stated above some here may just test-use your
engine in addition to others, eg. with their own book, tourn conditions,
or whatever; but why endless repeating your wish to get included in some
Ccrl testing at this early stage ? it's not for bug testing and you should
have an idea about it's playing strength anyway, without being included into
such leagues; hey maybe you also want to be included in the TCEC tourns ?
lol

Enough for now (and i don't know if i come back on the topic unless i see
some progress; anyway otherwise i predict a repetition of moves, like
last year, and you're probably leaving then again, but then for real)

best wishes for year
&good luck

[Graham Banks]

You can always rename it KarpovChess , or CapaChess or YouMustWantToTestEngineChess

Yes, but I don't want that to be another excuse for Graham not to test my engine.
viewtopic.php?p=974666#p974666

Man. With all due respect, you're like that one small piece of dog shit that one just can't shake off their walking shoes.

[LazySMP]

But why endless repeating your wish to get included in some CCRL testing at this early stage ?

Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.

You're like that one small piece of dog shit that one just can't shake off their walking shoes.

I always thought if my engine reach 2400 you would test it but I won't tolerate your disrespect.
The higher up I go, the harder it gets to tell the good guys from the bad.
I don't need you to test my engine anymore. Good Bye Bye ...

[jefk]

Many of life's failures are people who did not realize how close they were to success when they gave up.

Typical American (*) way of thinking (you find it some self help books).
Sometimes it's better to take a step back, wait, think, reflect, improve
and possibly change a few things. Example: what do you think of gambling
addicts who spends all their bucks every month waiting for the big hit?

So your idea of 'success' is being on the Ccrl list ? Get real.
Learning programming/improving programming skills is a fine goal, but
making a chess engine elo 2500 imo isn't a success; maybe it would
be for some AI, not for humans anymore. In general: Plan, do check act
(Deming, but actually if works for chess and life as well ).

PS you didn't address my other suggestions.
SS, bye indeed, time to extend my ignore list
another yet item for my new years resolutions !


PS2 yes culture does matter sometimes , while the discord engine discussions
seem to be like some dogfighting arena, the chess.com forum actually
doesn't seem to be much better. While the English chess forum does
seem to be quite decent (even more than talkchess, in fact)
https://www.ecforum.org.uk/index.php
don't know (yet) how they do it, maybe in addition to the culture
some excellent moderators, i'll have a look

[jefk]

there anyway are more rating lists than Ccrl
https://www.chessprogramming.org/Engine_Rating_Lists

here's a decent engine list:
http://computer-chess.org/doku.php?id=c ... ngine_list
and a - smaller- github list
https://github.com/EngineProgramming/engine-list

[Graham Banks]

there anyway are more rating lists than Ccrl
https://www.chessprogramming.org/Engine_Rating_Lists

here's a decent engine list:
http://computer-chess.org/doku.php?id=c ... ngine_list
and a - smaller- github list
https://github.com/EngineProgramming/engine-list

Also CEGT.