Alaric 707 Quick Results

Marc MP · Post by **Marc MP** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 4:15 am

I collected some bullet data: 40/2, 32M hash, Athlon 1.4 and 12-moves book.
Here are the results including the last entry: Alaric 707.

Code: Select all

Rank Name                 Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Strelka 1.8         2850   28   27   400   68%  2722   32% 
   2 Rybka 1.0 Beta      2839   32   31   300   67%  2724   32% 
   3 Spike 1.2           2766   33   33   250   51%  2757   40% 
   4 Chess Tiger 2007.1  2754   31   31   300   53%  2734   29% 
   5 Alaric 707          2739   38   38   200   46%  2768   26% 
   6 Naum 2.0            2709   38   37   200   57%  2659   31% 
   7 Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2702   24   24   500   49%  2706   29% 
   8 CM9 Tribute         2663   32   32   300   46%  2691   23% 
   9 Delfi 5.1           2660   31   31   300   43%  2706   28% 
  10 Alaric 704          2654   25   25   500   42%  2713   26% 
  11 Pharaon 3.5.1       2618   31   32   300   40%  2689   26% 
  12 Colossus 2007b      2564   34   35   250   37%  2660   24%

Code: Select all

5 Alaric 707          2739 200.0 ( 91.5 : 108.5)
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Strelka 1.8         2850
                               50.0 ( 23.5 :  26.5) Spike 1.2           2766
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2754
                               50.0 ( 29.0 :  21.0) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2702

Eelco de Groot · Post by **Eelco de Groot** » Mon Jul 16, 2007 9:15 am

Thanks for running the tournament Marc! The results in the UEL from Patrick Buchmann for Alaric are also pretty good. From your table, it would seem that Peter Fendrich made almost a 90 points gain from the last version. And the version 704 is barely three monts old! You won't see such a huge jump quite often I think... Certainly not with the better engines.

I wonder if the Deep IIb Alaric would have an even slightly better result at bullet.

But this is already quite good, I don't think the Deep settings could do better. Sometimes I think the Deep II settings are a bit too selective. But once there is an endgame on the board it can become quite interesting watching Alaric play! Even there I saw Deep IIb make a strangely sudden losing move some time back, having defended a difficult ending well for more than thirty moves.

Alaric Deep IIb, in one of the betas, stumbled and played 86...Kd8?

Rf1-a1, Rf1-g1, Rf1-f2, Ke8-f8 draw here according to Shredder's endgame database.

[d]4k3/1R6/8/3BK3/8/8/8/5r2 b - - 0 1

After 86... Kd8:

3k4/1R6/8/3BK3/8/8/8/5r2 w - -

Engine: Alaric 70706 Deep IIb (128 MB)
gemaakt door Peter Fendrich

9.00 0:00 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 (26.820) 28

10.00 0:00 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 (50.093) 45

11.00 0:00 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 (86.204) 68

12.01 0:01 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6 (140.919) 103

13.01 0:01 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 (237.969) 152

14.01 0:01 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 (418.674) 219

15.01 0:02 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 (707.115) 336

16.01 0:02 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 (1.180.932) 380

17.01 0:04 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 (1.965.072) 460

18.01 0:06 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1 (3.461.767) 538

19.01 0:09 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1
96.Tb2 (6.103.086) 600

20.01 0:14 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1
96.Tb2 Kd4 (10.427.523) 703

21.01 0:21 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1
96.Tb2 Kd4 97.Kc2 (16.703.558) 776

22.01 0:31 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1
96.Tb2 Kd4 97.Kc2 Ke3 (27.412.790) 867

23.01 0:43 +0.16 87.La2 Kc8 88.Tb6 Kc7 89.Tb5 Kc6
90.Tb4 Kc5 91.Tb3 Kc6 92.Kd4 Kd6
93.Ke3 Kc5 94.Ke2 Tc1 95.Kd2 Ta1
96.Tb2 Kd4 97.Kc2 Ke3 98.Kb3 (40.635.775) 925

23.12 1:48 +6.14 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Tf7 Te1 89.Lf3 Te3
90.Lc6 Td3+ 91.Ld5 Te3 92.Td7+ Ke8
93.Ta7 Kf8 94.Tf7+ Ke8 95.Tf4 Td3
96.Tg4 Txd5+ 97.Kxd5 Kf7 98.Ke5 Ke7
99.Tg7+ Kf8 100.Ta7 (90.553.459) 833

24.01 2:26 +6.24 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Tf7 Te1 89.Lf3 Te3
90.Lc6 Td3+ 91.Ld5 Te3 92.Td7+ Ke8
93.Ta7 Kf8 94.Tf7+ Ke8 95.Tf4 Td3
96.Tg4 Txd5+ 97.Kxd5 Kf7 98.Ke5 Ke7
99.Tg7+ Kd8 100.Kd4 (117.321.893) 800

25.01 2:55 +6.24 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Tf7 Te1 89.Lf3 Te3
90.Lc6 Td3+ 91.Ld5 Te3 92.Td7+ Ke8
93.Ta7 Kf8 94.Tf7+ Ke8 95.Tf4 Td3
96.Tb4 Txd5+ 97.Kxd5 Kf7 98.Tb5 Ke7
99.Ke5 Kd8 100.Tb7 (138.657.272) 788

26.01 3:58 +6.24 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Tf7 Te1 89.Lf3 Te3
90.Lc6 Td3+ 91.Ld5 Te3 92.Td7+ Ke8
93.Ta7 Kf8 94.Tf7+ Ke8 95.Tf4 Td3
96.Tg4 Txd5+ 97.Kxd5 Ke7 98.Ke5 Kd7
99.Tc4 Ke7 100.Tc7+ (182.718.738) 767

3k4/1R6/8/3BK3/8/8/8/5r2 w - -

Engine: Glaurung 2-epsilon/5 (128 MB)
gemaakt door Tord Romstad

2.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Ta7 Te1+ 88.Kd4 (179)

3.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Ta7 Te1+ 88.Le4 Tc1 (351)

4.00 0:00 +1.03 87.Ta7 Te1+ 88.Le4 Tc1 89.Tf7 (629)

4.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lf5 Tc1 (744)

5.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Ld5 (1.464)

6.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Lf7+ Kd8
90.Ld5 (2.470)

7.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Lf7+ Kd8
90.Le6 Ke8 (4.976)

8.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Lf7+ Kd8
90.Le6 Ke8 91.Ld5 (13.609) 907

9.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Lf7+ Kd8
90.Le6 Ke8 91.Tg7 Td8 (28.641) 923

10.00 0:00 +1.05 87.Le6 Ke8 88.Lc4 Td1 89.Lf7+ Kd8
90.Le6 Ke8 91.Tg7 Kd8 92.Ld5 (64.750) 1044

10.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Te1
90.Le6+ Kb8 91.Ld5 Te8 92.Le6 (139.959) 1119

11.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Te1
90.Le6+ Kb8 91.Ld5 Te8 92.Le6 Tf8 (151.183) 1209

12.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Td1+ 91.Ld5 Tf1 92.Te7 Tf5
93.Tg7 (219.942) 1176

13.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Td1+ 91.Ld5 Tf1 92.Te7 Tf5
93.Le6 Tf1 (327.865) 1166

14.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Tf1 91.Ke5 Te1+ 92.Kd5 Td1+
93.Kc5 Tc1+ 94.Lc4 Kc8 95.Kd4 (539.412) 1234

15.00 0:00 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Tf1 91.Ld5 Tf8 92.Ke5 Kc8
93.Le6+ Kd8 94.Td7+ Ke8 95.Lf5 (939.309) 1252

16.01 0:01 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Tc2 91.Lf5 Tb2 92.Le4 Td2+
93.Ld5 Te2 94.Tb7+ Kc8 95.Ta7 Tb2 (1.849.366) 1066

17.01 0:03 +1.07 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Kc8 89.Tg7 Kb8
90.Le6 Tc2 91.Lf5 Tb2 92.Le4 Td2+
93.Ld5 Te2 94.Tb7+ Kc8 95.Ta7 Tb2
96.Le6+ Kb8 (3.223.691) 987

18.01 0:07 +80.61 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Tb4+ Kc7 98.Ke5 (6.179.451) 882

19.01 0:10 +80.61 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Th4 Kb6 98.Th8 (8.784.869) 808

20.01 0:17 +80.66 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Kd6 Kb6 98.Tb4+ Ka5
99.Kc5 (12.933.036) 732

21.01 0:30 +80.66 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Kd6 Kb6 98.Tb4+ Ka6
99.Kc7 Ka5 (19.778.291) 648

22.01 0:56 +80.66 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Kd6 Kb6 98.Tb4+ Ka6
99.Kc7 Ka5 100.Tb8 (34.356.306) 607

23.01 1:23 +80.71 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kb7 97.Kd6 Kb6 98.Tb4+ Ka6
99.Kd5 Ka5 100.Kc4 (51.050.922) 609

24.01 2:13 +80.71 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Tb4 Kd7 98.Tb7+ Kc8
99.Tg7 Kd8 100.Ta7 (81.143.350) 607

25.01 3:25 +80.75 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Tb4 Kd7 98.Tb7+ Kc8
99.Tg7 Kd8 100.Ke6 (125.703.123) 611

26.01 5:03 +M14 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tg7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Tf4 Kb6 98.Kd6 Kb5
99.Te4 Ka6 100.Kc7 (185.045.025) 609

Alaric 70706 Default finds much faster than Deep IIb that White now is winning and does not make the sudden mistake. That's why I thought that in an endgame there is sometimes too much selectivity using the Deep IIb settings but it can happen elsewhere too I suppose...

3k4/1R6/8/3BK3/8/8/8/5r2 w - -

Engine: Alaric 70706 Default (128 MB)
gemaakt door Peter Fendrich

9.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 (5.906)

10.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1 (12.317)

11.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 (20.658) 29

12.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 Kc7 (39.507) 46

13.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 Kc7 94.Le4 (86.074) 89

14.00 0:00 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 Kc7 94.Le4 Kd8 (154.895) 138

15.01 0:01 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 Kc7 94.Le4 Kd8 95.Kd2 (281.808) 212

16.01 0:01 +0.16 87.Kd4 Td1+ 88.Kc4 Tc1+ 89.Kd3 Kc8
90.Ke4 Td1 91.Tb5 Kd8 92.Ke3 Ta1
93.Ke2 Kc7 94.Le4 Kd8 95.Kd2 Kc7 (578.526) 311

16.12 0:02 +5.53 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Tg7 Td3+
90.Ld5 Te3 91.Td7+ Ke8 92.Ta7 Kf8
93.Tf7+ Ke8 94.Tf4 Td3 95.Tg4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Ke7 (801.074) 364

17.01 0:02 +5.62 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Tg7 Td3+
90.Ld5 Te3 91.Td7+ Ke8 92.Ta7 Kf8
93.Tf7+ Ke8 94.Tf4 Td3 95.Tb4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Ke7 97.Ke5 (1.247.005) 394

18.01 0:03 +5.74 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Tb4 Kd8 (1.644.407) 441

19.01 0:04 +5.72 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Ta7+ Kb6 98.Tf7 Kb5
99.Tb7+ Ka4 (2.313.948) 476

20.01 0:07 +5.74 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Tc4+ Kd7 98.Ke5 Kd8
99.Kd5 (4.181.261) 541

21.01 0:11 +5.74 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Ta3 Kb6 98.Tb3+ Kc7
99.Tb1 Kd8 (7.790.823) 628

22.01 0:21 +6.08 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Kc5 Kd7 98.Te4 Kc8
99.Te7 Kd8 (15.193.512) 706

23.01 0:31 +6.12 87.Kd6 Tc1 88.Lb3 Tc3 89.Le6 Td3+
90.Ld5 Tc3 91.Td7+ Kc8 92.Tf7 Kb8
93.Tb7+ Kc8 94.Tb4 Td3 95.Ta4 Txd5+
96.Kxd5 Kc7 97.Kc5 Kd7 98.Te4 Kc8
99.Te7 Kd8 100.Kd6 (23.122.738) 731

Regards, Eelco

Marc MP · Post by **Marc MP** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 4:51 am

Eelco de Groot wrote:
...

I wonder if the Deep IIb Alaric would have an even slightly better result at bullet. But this is already quite good, I don't think the Deep settings could do better. Sometimes I think the Deep II settings are a bit too selective. But once there is an endgame on the board it can become quite interesting watching Alaric play! Even there I saw Deep IIb make a strangely sudden losing move some time back, having defended a difficult ending well for more than thirty moves.

...

Regards, Eelco

I'll try to figure out later on this week if the Deep IIb settings are superiors for bullets!

Meanwhile the default slowed down a bit and the current standings are:

Code: Select all

Rank Name                 Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Strelka 1.8         2846   28   27   400   68%  2718   32% 
   2 Rybka 1.0 Beta      2834   29   29   350   66%  2722   33% 
   3 Spike 1.2           2759   33   32   250   51%  2751   40% 
   4 Chess Tiger 2007.1  2751   31   31   300   53%  2730   29% 
   5 Naum 2.0            2731   34   34   250   58%  2673   30% 
   6 Alaric 707          2713   27   27   400   47%  2733   29% 
   7 Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2703   24   24   500   49%  2707   29% 
   8 Delfi 5.1           2667   29   29   350   44%  2710   29% 
   9 CM9 Tribute         2665   32   32   300   46%  2692   23% 
  10 Alaric 704          2657   25   25   500   42%  2715   26% 
  11 Pharaon 3.5.1       2623   31   32   300   40%  2693   26% 
  12 Colossus 2007b      2571   31   32   300   36%  2671   26%

Code: Select all

6 Alaric 707          2713 400.0 (188.5 : 211.5)
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Strelka 1.8         2846
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Rybka 1.0 Beta      2834
                               50.0 ( 23.5 :  26.5) Spike 1.2           2759
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2751
                               50.0 ( 18.5 :  31.5) Naum 2.0            2731
                               50.0 ( 29.0 :  21.0) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2703
                               50.0 ( 27.0 :  23.0) Delfi 5.1           2667
                               50.0 ( 34.0 :  16.0) Colossus 2007b      2571

My first impression is that Alaric has more endgame knowledge than the average engine. I saw it save difficult endgames many times. So my guess is that the position you posted is more the exception than the rule.

I'll post the results when I'll have them for DeepIIb

swami · Post by **swami** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 5:08 am

My first impression is that Alaric has more endgame knowledge than the average engine. I saw it save difficult endgames many times. So my guess is that the position you posted is more the exception than the rule.

Shredder is the best engine out there that has more endgame knowledge than Rybka and all other engines.

Eelco de Groot · Post by **Eelco de Groot** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:12 am

Marc MP wrote:
Eelco de Groot wrote:
...

I wonder if the Deep IIb Alaric would have an even slightly better result at bullet. But this is already quite good, I don't think the Deep settings could do better. Sometimes I think the Deep II settings are a bit too selective. But once there is an endgame on the board it can become quite interesting watching Alaric play! Even there I saw Deep IIb make a strangely sudden losing move some time back, having defended a difficult ending well for more than thirty moves.

...

Regards, Eelco
I'll try to figure out later on this week if the Deep IIb settings are superiors for bullets!

Meanwhile the default slowed down a bit and the current standings are:
Code: Select all
Rank Name                 Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Strelka 1.8         2846   28   27   400   68%  2718   32% 
   2 Rybka 1.0 Beta      2834   29   29   350   66%  2722   33% 
   3 Spike 1.2           2759   33   32   250   51%  2751   40% 
   4 Chess Tiger 2007.1  2751   31   31   300   53%  2730   29% 
   5 Naum 2.0            2731   34   34   250   58%  2673   30% 
   6 Alaric 707          2713   27   27   400   47%  2733   29% 
   7 Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2703   24   24   500   49%  2707   29% 
   8 Delfi 5.1           2667   29   29   350   44%  2710   29% 
   9 CM9 Tribute         2665   32   32   300   46%  2692   23% 
  10 Alaric 704          2657   25   25   500   42%  2715   26% 
  11 Pharaon 3.5.1       2623   31   32   300   40%  2693   26% 
  12 Colossus 2007b      2571   31   32   300   36%  2671   26% 
Code: Select all
6 Alaric 707          2713 400.0 (188.5 : 211.5)
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Strelka 1.8         2846
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Rybka 1.0 Beta      2834
                               50.0 ( 23.5 :  26.5) Spike 1.2           2759
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2751
                               50.0 ( 18.5 :  31.5) Naum 2.0            2731
                               50.0 ( 29.0 :  21.0) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2703
                               50.0 ( 27.0 :  23.0) Delfi 5.1           2667
                               50.0 ( 34.0 :  16.0) Colossus 2007b      2571
My first impression is that Alaric has more endgame knowledge than the average engine. I saw it save difficult endgames many times. So my guess is that the position you posted is more the exception than the rule.

I'll post the results when I'll have them for DeepIIb

It would be great to have some better data for Deep IIb, Marc. I can hardly wait if you could do this!

Yes, I think Peter has made a special effort with Alaric's endgames! No tablebases yet or any bitbases implemented! It is funny Swami mentions Shredder, it reminds me of one testgame Alaric played with the H50N4 settings a while back and in the endgame Shredder had absolutely no clue what was going on

Even with its 5 men tablebases. Maybe Shredder 10 with all bitbases would do better but I am really impressed with those programs that do not really need them. Maybe it is so that there actually is quite some variety in endgame positions and how the programs play them, they can be strong in one particular type of position but not so good in others. At least that is how I see it personally. And the amateurs sometimes outperform the professionals!

This was one of the very first testgames that Alaric H50N4 played against Shredder. I still have to finish that match to get some better comparison data. But look at Shredder and Alaric's eval in the end

[Event "6 minuten per partij + 6 seconden per zet"]
[Site "Engine Match"]
[Date "2007.07.05"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Alaric SD300r100H50N4"]
[Black "Shredder 9.1 UCI"]
[Result "1-0"]

1. d4 {Boek 0s} Nf6 {Boek 0s} 2. c4 {Boek 0s} e6 {Boek 0s}
3. Nc3 {Boek 0s} Bb4 {Boek 0s} 4. e3 {Boek 0s} O-O {Boek
0s} 5. Bd3 {Boek 0s} d5 {Boek 0s} 6. Nf3 {Boek 0s} c5 {Boek
0s} 7. O-O {Boek 0s} dxc4 {Boek 0s} 8. Bxc4 {Boek 0s} cxd4
{Boek 0s} 9. exd4 {Boek 0s} b6 {Boek 0s} 10. Bg5 {Boek 0s}
Bb7 {Boek 0s} 11. Qe2 {Boek 0s} Bxc3 {Boek 0s} 12. bxc3
{Boek 0s} Nbd7 {Boek 0s} 13. Bd3 {Boek 0s} Qc7 {-0.50/14
26s} 14. Rac1 {Boek 0s} Rfe8 {Boek 0s} 15. Rfe1 {Boek 0s}
Rac8 {Boek 0s} 16. c4 {Boek 0s} Qd6 {Boek 0s} 17. Rcd1
{Boek 0s} h6 {-0.51/15 31s} 18. Bc1 {Boek 0s} Red8
{-0.53/14 22s} 19. Bb2 {+0.39/13 21s} Nh5 {-0.46/14 25s}
20. Qe3 {+0.38/14 24s} Qf4 {-0.47/15 22s} 21. Nd2 {+0.40/14
20s} Ndf6 {-0.55/15 1:04m} 22. g3 {+0.38/15 32s} Qd6
{-0.82/14 23s} 23. a3 {+0.45/14 30s} Qc6 {-0.93/13 25s}
24. f3 {+0.51/13 18s} Ne8 {-1.01/14 24s} 25. Ne4 {+0.49/13
18s} Nhf6 {-0.77/13 15s} 26. Rc1 {+0.58/13 17s} Nxe4
{-0.86/12 7s} 27. Qxe4 {+0.40/15 23s} Qxe4 {-0.28/17 17s}
28. fxe4 {+0.35/17 16s} e5 {-0.42/18 16s} 29. d5 {+0.33/17
16s} f6 {-0.79/19 33s} 30. a4 {+0.54/16 15s} Nd6 {-0.85/18
18s} 31. Ba3 {+0.62/17 15s} Ba6 {-1.06/17 22s} 32. Bxd6
{+0.67/18 19s} Rxd6 {-0.85/19 14s} 33. a5 {+0.75/17 14s}
Rc5 {-0.91/18 15s} 34. axb6 {+0.72/18 15s} axb6 {-0.84/19
18s} 35. Kf2 {+0.71/16 14s} Kf7 {-0.84/17 7s} 36. Rc2
{+0.70/17 13s} Ra5 {-0.92/17 9s} 37. Rb1 {+0.77/15 14s} Ra3
{-0.92/17 10s} 38. Be2 {+0.83/15 13s} Ke7 {-0.97/17 14s}
39. Rb4 {+0.90/16 14s} Kd8 {-0.97/17 10s} 40. Rbb2
{+0.86/17 25s} Ra5 {-1.08/16 8s} 41. Ra2 {+0.95/18 15s}
Rxa2 {-0.87/19 10s} 42. Rxa2 {+0.88/18 11s} Bb7 {-1.00/20
10s} 43. Ra7 {+0.86/17 11s} Kc7 {-0.61/18 10s} 44. Bh5
{+0.84/16 11s} Rd8 {-0.78/19 11s} 45. Kf3 {+0.81/15 11s}
Kb8 {-0.80/18 7s} 46. Ra3 {+0.75/16 11s} Kc7 {-0.70/18 17s}
47. Ra2 {+0.73/15 10s} Kd6 {-0.56/17 9s} 48. Bg4 {+0.74/16
13s} Kc5 {-0.62/17 15s} 49. Ra7 {+0.75/16 16s} Rb8
{-0.59/16 3s} 50. Ke3 {+0.90/16 26s} h5 {-0.93/17 13s}
51. Be6 {+0.97/16 9s} g5 {-1.42/17 9s} 52. h4 {+1.23/17
15s} Kxc4 {-1.48/17 6s} 53. g4 {+2.41/16 9s} hxg4 {-0.85/17
13s} 54. h5 {+2.33/15 8s} g3 {+0.67/16 8s} 55. Kf3
{+2.86/14 10s} Kd4 {+0.42/15 7s} 56. h6 {+3.17/14 8s}

[d]1r6/Rb6/1p2Bp1P/3Pp1p1/3kP3/5Kp1/8/8 b - -

{Shredder is lost already, and White will win whatever Black plays, but the next move is particularly bad I think..}

Bc8 {?? This gives away the seventh to White's Rook that can now give cover to the pawn on h6, blocks the eighth so Black's Rook can't stop it, although that would be at the cost of losing its Bishop, and in case of Bc8xe6 d5xe6 White just has two of such dangerous pawns on the sixth rank! Rb8-b7 is not possible. I think it must be some bug in Shredder's endgame routines here, looking at its next evals}

{+0.34/14 4s} 57. h7 {+6.21/13 8s} g2 {-7.03/17 21s}
58. Ra4+ {+5.78/16 12s} Kc3 {+0.39/13 0s} 59. Ra1 {+6.40/14
8s} Bxe6 {-0.59/16 6s} 60. dxe6 {+5.65/16 8s} b5 {-0.59/16
3s} 61. Rc1+ {+5.65/15 9s} Kd2 {-0.05/18 6s} 62. Rb1
{+5.60/16 8s} Rh8 {-0.05/17 3s} 63. e7 {+5.41/16 7s} Kc2
{-0.04/17 3s} 64. Rg1 {+5.52/16 8s} b4 {-0.79/18 21s}
65. Rxg2+ {+5.25/15 8s} Kd3 {-1.77/18 1s} 66. Kg4 {+6.60/15
8s} Kxe4 {-2.52/16 13s} 67. Rf2 {+7.49/15 7s} b3 {-1.83/12
0s} 68. Rxf6 {+7.27/15 10s} b2 {-2.96/13 1s} 69. Rb6
{+8.89/16 7s} Kd5 {-4.64/15 5s} 70. Kf5 {+8.98/15 7s} e4
{-4.87/14 5s} 71. Rxb2 {+10.18/15 7s} e3 {-12.42/15 7s}
72. Rb4 {+10.30/15 9s} Re8 {-30.68/14 14s} 73. Re4
{+10.61/16 7s} 1-0

swami · Post by **swami** » Tue Jul 17, 2007 9:50 am

Hi Eelco,

Yes, I think Peter has made a special effort with Alaric's endgames! No tablebases yet or any bitbases implemented! It is funny Swami mentions Shredder, it reminds me of one testgame Alaric played with the H50N4 settings a while back and in the endgame Shredder had absolutely no clue what was going on And the amateurs sometimes outperform the professionals!

It is proven that shredder is the best in endgames, atleast I read it from more than a single source. It's not about a freeware and a commercial and it's not even about a game,it's about the test.There are several Endgame test available for download,Maybe Pavel can test Alaric in larsson ending's test?

[The game of the Old shredder version skipped]

Marc MP · Post by **Marc MP** » Wed Jul 18, 2007 11:13 am

I finished the gauntlet: both 704 and 707 played everybody else in the list. I'm about to start the same with Deep IIb now.

Code: Select all

Rank Name                 Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Strelka 1.8         2849   28   27   400   68%  2721   32% 
   2 Rybka 1.0 Beta      2838   30   29   350   66%  2725   33% 
   3 Spike 1.2           2764   31   30   300   54%  2738   38% 
   4 Chess Tiger 2007.1  2758   29   29   350   56%  2720   29% 
   5 Gambit Fruit 4bx    2740   38   38   200   58%  2685   31% 
   6 Naum 2.0            2733   34   34   250   58%  2674   30% 
   7 Alaric 707          2720   22   22   600   51%  2714   29% 
   8 Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2708   22   22   600   50%  2706   30% 
   9 CM9 Tribute         2663   30   30   350   45%  2698   24% 
  10 Delfi 5.1           2661   27   28   400   43%  2707   28% 
  11 Alaric 704          2657   23   23   600   42%  2714   27% 
  12 CMX Descent         2656   29   29   350   41%  2715   28% 
  13 Pharaon 3.5.1       2622   30   30   350   39%  2699   25% 
  14 Colossus 2007b      2572   32   32   300   36%  2672   26%

Code: Select all

   7 Alaric 707          2720 600.0 (305.0 : 295.0)
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Strelka 1.8         2849
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Rybka 1.0 Beta      2838
                               50.0 ( 23.5 :  26.5) Spike 1.2           2764
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2758
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) Gambit Fruit 4bx    2740
                               50.0 ( 18.5 :  31.5) Naum 2.0            2733
                               50.0 ( 29.0 :  21.0) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2708
                               50.0 ( 31.0 :  19.0) CM9 Tribute         2663
                               50.0 ( 27.0 :  23.0) Delfi 5.1           2661
                               50.0 ( 31.5 :  18.5) CMX Descent         2656
                               50.0 ( 32.5 :  17.5) Pharaon 3.5.1       2622
                               50.0 ( 34.0 :  16.0) Colossus 2007b      2572

Code: Select all

  11 Alaric 704          2657 600.0 (252.0 : 348.0)
                               50.0 ( 14.5 :  35.5) Strelka 1.8         2849
                               50.0 ( 12.5 :  37.5) Rybka 1.0 Beta      2838
                               50.0 ( 16.5 :  33.5) Spike 1.2           2764
                               50.0 ( 21.0 :  29.0) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2758
                               50.0 ( 21.0 :  29.0) Gambit Fruit 4bx    2740
                               50.0 ( 22.5 :  27.5) Naum 2.0            2733
                               50.0 ( 25.0 :  25.0) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2708
                               50.0 ( 21.5 :  28.5) CM9 Tribute         2663
                               50.0 ( 23.5 :  26.5) Delfi 5.1           2661
                               50.0 ( 22.0 :  28.0) CMX Descent         2656
                               50.0 ( 22.0 :  28.0) Pharaon 3.5.1       2622
                               50.0 ( 30.0 :  20.0) Colossus 2007b      2572

Marc MP · Post by **Marc MP** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 6:37 am

I finished Alaric Deep IIb gauntlet.

Code: Select all

Rank Name                 Elo    +    - games score oppo. draws 
   1 Strelka 1.8         2843   25   24   500   67%  2724   34% 
   2 Rybka 1.0 Beta      2836   28   28   400   67%  2721   31% 
   3 Gambit Fruit 4bx    2778   28   27   400   61%  2703   31% 
   4 Spike 1.2           2762   27   27   400   54%  2731   35% 
   5 Chess Tiger 2007.1  2756   24   24   500   55%  2723   30% 
   6 Alaric 707          2720   23   23   600   51%  2714   29% 
   7 Naum 2.0            2716   27   27   400   52%  2698   33% 
   8 Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2709   22   21   650   50%  2707   30% 
   9 Alaric Deep IIb     2703   22   23   600   48%  2714   29% 
  10 CM9 Tribute         2666   28   28   400   45%  2697   24% 
  11 CMX Descent         2660   27   28   400   42%  2718   28% 
  12 Alaric 704          2657   23   23   600   42%  2714   27% 
  13 Delfi 5.1           2655   26   26   450   43%  2704   27% 
  14 Pharaon 3.5.1       2618   28   28   400   39%  2697   24% 
  15 Colossus 2007b      2571   28   29   400   34%  2688   25%

Code: Select all

   9 Alaric Deep IIb     2703 600.0 (289.0 : 311.0)
                               50.0 ( 15.5 :  34.5) Strelka 1.8         2843
                               50.0 ( 16.0 :  34.0) Rybka 1.0 Beta      2836
                               50.0 ( 15.5 :  34.5) Gambit Fruit 4bx    2778
                               50.0 ( 25.0 :  25.0) Spike 1.2           2762
                               50.0 ( 17.5 :  32.5) Chess Tiger 2007.1  2756
                               50.0 ( 26.5 :  23.5) Naum 2.0            2716
                               50.0 ( 24.5 :  25.5) Glaurung 2 - eps/4  2709
                               50.0 ( 25.5 :  24.5) CM9 Tribute         2666
                               50.0 ( 28.0 :  22.0) CMX Descent         2660
                               50.0 ( 30.5 :  19.5) Delfi 5.1           2655
                               50.0 ( 31.5 :  18.5) Pharaon 3.5.1       2618
                               50.0 ( 33.0 :  17.0) Colossus 2007b      2571

Peter Fendrich · Post by **Peter Fendrich** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 9:41 am

Thank you for doing these tests.
What book did you use?
/Peter

Marc MP · Post by **Marc MP** » Mon Jul 23, 2007 11:09 am

Peter Fendrich wrote:Thank you for doing these tests.
What book did you use?
/Peter

Every engine in the list plays with a generic 12-moves polyglot book. I set learn depth = 0 in the uci-options to set off learning. Is that the way to do it? What is the learning about? (own) book learning or something else?

Thank you for the engine!,

Alaric 707 Quick Results

Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results

Re: Alaric 707 Quick Results