Glaurung 2.1 v Naum 3.1

[Steve Maughan]

Currently I have Glaurung 2.1 slaughtering Naum 3.1 by +7 =1 +1 at blitz (3m+1s). It's early days but Tord's baby may be a big improvement! What do other have?

Cheers,

Steve

[George Tsavdaris]

Currently I have Glaurung 2.1 slaughtering Naum 3.1 by +7 =1 +1 at blitz (3m+1s). It's early days but Tord's baby may be a big improvement! What do other have?

For now it was slaughtering me +8 =0 -0 BUT at Knight handicap games in favor of Glaurung! 4+2" is the time.

I'm not giving Glaurung a Knight more because i'm so much better than it is, NO, for God's sake. But just for fun.....

And in the 9th game surprise! I drew it! Later i lost another 3 so now i am on +11 =1 -0 form Glaurung's perspective.

I'm playing with white every game(Glaurung obviously with black) and the starting position is:

[d]rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1


The only game i drew is the following.

[Event "Blitz:4'+2"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "????.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "George"]
[Black "Glaurung 2.1"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/R1BQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "78"]
[TimeControl "240+2"]

{128MB, USER} 1. e4 {0} e6 {-3.64/15 22} 2. d4 {2} Nf6 {-3.54/14 11} 3. Bd3 {2}
d6 {-3.47/14 18} 4. Nf3 {1} Be7 {-3.43/14 7} 5. g4 {4} O-O {-4.13/14 9} 6. g5 {
1} Nfd7 {-4.19/14 8} 7. h4 {17} c5 {-4.58/13 6} 8. c3 {5} Nc6 {-4.60/13 7} 9.
a3 {7} Qb6 {-5.00/13 6} 10. Bd2 {5} Qxb2 {-6.05/14 9} 11. Rb1 {2} Qxa3 {
-1.05/15 5} 12. Ra1 {2} Qb2 {-0.78/15 6} 13. Rb1 {1} Nb4 {-0.96/15 8} 14. cxb4
{26} Qa3 {-0.62/15 10} 15. Be2 {7} c4 {-0.62/14 5} 16. Bxc4 {11} Nb6 {
-0.70/16 8} 17. Ra1 {15} Qxa1 {-0.58/15 4} 18. Qxa1 {1} Nxc4 {-0.66/10 0} 19.
h5 {3} d5 {-0.66/14 7} 20. Qc3 {13} a5 {-0.84/13 8} 21. bxa5 {2} Rxa5 {
-0.84/13 6} 22. Bc1 {17} Ra4 {-0.58/12 5} 23. Qb3 {6} Ra1 {-0.41/13 6} 24. O-O
{5} dxe4 {-0.35/14 6} 25. Qxc4 {1} exf3 {-0.09/14 5} 26. Qc7 {4} Re8 {
-0.09/14 4} 27. h6 {27} b5 {-0.07/13 8} 28. Kh1 {3} Bxg5 {-1.39/13 5} 29. Rg1 {
1} Rxc1 {-0.84/14 4} 30. Rxc1 {1} Bxc1 {-0.49/15 3} 31. Qxc1 {1} gxh6 {
-0.43/17 5} 32. Qc6 {12} Rf8 {0.00/18 4} 33. Qxb5 {1} Kg7 {0.00/18 4} 34. Qe5+
{1} f6 {0.00/20 4} 35. Qc7+ {2} Kg6 {0.00/20 5} 36. Qg3+ {3} Kf7 {0.00/21 4}
37. Qc7+ {2} Kg6 {0.00/23 4} 38. Qg3+ {1} Kf7 {0.00/23 5} 39. Qc7+ {1} Kg6 {
0.00/24 4} 1/2-1/2


As you can see there was one point where Glaurung gave itself a +6.05/14 score.
But it grabbed a poisoned Pawn at move 10, and its score fell rapidly.
It still believed it had the small advantage but my surprise for it move 28.Kh1!! secured the draw for me....

[Tomcass]

I have decided to test Glaurung against 4 strong engines (not the TOP ones, except Toga), one of the commercial. My expectations before the test:

60% against Bright-0.3a and WildCat 8
50% against Loop 13.6 and
30% against the very strong Toga II 1.4.2JD

Hardware: Quad 6700
Ponder: Off
Gui: Hiarcs 12
Book: All programmes with Hiarcs12 book.
25 minutes per game
NO tablebases.

The results:


2008Glaurung2.1 2008

Glaurung 2.1 (JA) - bright-0.3a 7.0 - 3.0 +5/-1/=4 70.00%
Glaurung 2.1 (JA) - Loop 13.6(x4) 6.0 - 4.0 +3/-1/=6 60.00%
Glaurung 2.1 (JA) - Toga II 1.4.2JD 3.5 - 6.5 +0/-3/=7 35.00%
Glaurung 2.1 (JA) - WildCat 8 UCI 7.0 - 3.0 +6/-2/=2 70.00%

Glaurung performed better than my expectations in all four matches. I will test it again soon.

... a minor suggestion: I realized that G2.1 tends to 'overestimate' some positions in the endgame where not only a human, but also the other programmes clearly evaluate as 0,00. For example when different color bishops are in place.

A very good program indeed, with a substantial improvement over the previous version. Very well done, Tord!!.

Regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

[Werner]

Hi Tom,
I am not sure which Glaurung version you used (64 bit?).

Here an interim result for CEGT 40/20

1 TogaII142JD-1cpu 2200 ½11½11½00½01½1½00½10 10.5/20
2 Glaurung 2.1 w32 1CPU 2200 ½00½00½11½10½0½11½01 9.5/20

Here Glaurung scored much better - but I know, only 20 games...

regards

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Hi Tom,
I am not sure which Glaurung version you used (64 bit?).

Here an interim result for CEGT 40/20

1 TogaII142JD-1cpu 2200 ½11½11½00½01½1½00½10 10.5/20
2 Glaurung 2.1 w32 1CPU 2200 ½00½00½11½10½0½11½01 9.5/20

Here Glaurung scored much better - but I know, only 20 games...

regards

Hi Werenr,
I was also surprised at Glaurung's 30% against Toga,something must be wrong....

[krazyken]

Here Glaurung scored much better - but I know, only 20 games...

regards

well 20 games is probably better than 10

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Here Glaurung scored much better - but I know, only 20 games...

regards

well 20 games is probably better than 10

The thing is that I don't think that the gap is that big between Glaurung and Toga....

[krazyken]

Here Glaurung scored much better - but I know, only 20 games...

regards

well 20 games is probably better than 10

The thing is that I don't think that the gap is that big between Glaurung and Toga....

That's what I'm saying, Tom only had 10 games... so 35% is within the margin of being nearly equal

[Marc MP]

Currently I have Glaurung 2.1 slaughtering Naum 3.1 by +7 =1 +1 at blitz (3m+1s). It's early days but Tord's baby may be a big improvement! What do other have?

Cheers,

Steve

I ran a 100 game match against Strelka 2.0 (from fixed positions) at 2m+1s on my PIV 3.2 Ghz and the result was 61-39 in favor of Strelka.

[Tord Romstad]

I was also surprised at Glaurung's 30% against Toga,something must be wrong....

Hello Wael,

No reason to suspect anything wrong. 30% for Glaurung in a 100 game match would indicate something wrong, but 3.5 points in 10 games is nothing unusual. Even 2/10 wouldn't be very remarkable; almost everything is possible in a 10-game match.

Tord