Zappa Mexico II 32-bit v Naum 3 32-bit A GRAND FINISH!

[geots]

Zappa Mexico II 32-bit v Naum 3 32-bit



Fritz 11 GUI
Intel Dual Core
Single Processor- 3.2ghz
128mb hash
3 & 4 man egtb
Perfect 12.32.ctg book (w/ 12 move CCRL limit)
40 moves in 58 minutes repeating (Adapted to CCRL 40/40)
Both Engines = 32-bit
Both Engines = 1 CPU
Match = 30 Games Total
Run by George Speight


After Rybka Match- Possible Naum Retribution?

Latest/Most Recent Version of Zappa Mexico Is Being Used Here

Updates Posted Every Few Days

Down 15-13, Naum draws game 29 and wins game 30.

In conclusion we have:

Zappa Mexico II 32-bit +7-6=17 = 15.5 / Naum 3 32-bit +6-7=17 = 14.5


How would you have a finish closer than this was? It was IMO a befitting ending to a grand battle between 2 very strong engines.


The entire 30 game package is available for download from:
http://kirr.homeunix.org/chess/discussi ... f=7&t=3158

[Ovyron]

Congrats to Zappa Mexico, I guess it's still #2 engine, no excuses?

[geots]

Congrats to Zappa Mexico, I guess it's still #2 engine, no excuses?

No excuses on my end, Ulysses. Hope you enjoy the PGNs.

[Uri Blass]

Congrats to Zappa Mexico, I guess it's still #2 engine, no excuses?

No

I guess that the hardware or the book that was used does not like Naum

It seems that the hardware simply does not like to see Naum winning.
A proof for it is that
I remember reading that George remember that Naum was leading by 1 win but the hardware decided to crash and George lost the games.

Note that I predicted 15-15 result
http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19652

If we consider the games that got lost when naum was leading by 1 point then it seems that Naum got 50% in the games against zappa.

Uri

[Spock]

No

I guess that the hardware or the book that was used does not like Naum

No

At this time control on a single CPU, Zappa is capable of beating Naum 3 in a straight fight. From our list:

Naum 3 64-bit vs Zappa Mexico II 64-bit (15.5 - 20.5)
Both 1 CPU

But in terms of overall ratings, Naum is clearly stronger.

[Uri Blass]

No

I guess that the hardware or the book that was used does not like Naum

No

At this time control on a single CPU, Zappa is capable of beating Naum 3 in a straight fight. From our list:

Naum 3 64-bit vs Zappa Mexico II 64-bit (15.5 - 20.5)
Both 1 CPU

But in terms of overall ratings, Naum is clearly stronger.

This is with 64 bits and not 32 bits and zappa earns more from 64 bits.

Uri

[Uri Blass]

Some more results

cegt blitz:

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_4_Ra ... on/66.html

Naum3.0 32 bits- Zappa Mexico II w32 1CPU + 77 = 67 - 36

cegt 40/20

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_40%2 ... on/41.html

Naum3.0 32 bits- Zappa Mexico II w32 1CPU +5 =8 -7 but of course not enough games were played to get conclusions that zappa is better than naum when we ignore other opponents.

Uri

[geots]

Congrats to Zappa Mexico, I guess it's still #2 engine, no excuses?

No

I guess that the hardware or the book that was used does not like Naum

It seems that the hardware simply does not like to see Naum winning.
A proof for it is that
I remember reading that George remember that Naum was leading by 1 win but the hardware decided to crash and George lost the games.

Note that I predicted 15-15 result
http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php?t=19652

If we consider the games that got lost when naum was leading by 1 point then it seems that Naum got 50% in the games against zappa.

Uri[/quote



Hi Uri. Let me just set the record straight here, so there wont be any misunderstanding. I did lose the games i had run when Naum was leading by 1 game- just as you say. But i have to admit that losing the games was caused by my error, and not any error on the part of the hardware. (If i stated it was the hardware's fault- i just misstated it). And the whole problem arose because i ran this match on my new dual core Vista box, and there are some differences that i overlooked taking care of. I guess you could say the whole unfortunate incident was my fault. But i took great care to give you good, reliable results here. And i hope you enjoy the PGNs. I can tell you now, Uri- that i checked very, very often- and neither was using more than one CPU, and neither engine showed any CPU usage when it wasnt his turn to think- with ponder being OFF. You get the Trophy or "Gold Star" or call it what you like, because you were dead on target with the outcome. In fact, i really myself consider 15.5-14.5 a draw anyway. It is just too close to form any concrete proof for me. I truly think the differences you see in the rating lists anwwhere with 1 CPU and 32-bit will come from the different results the 2 engines have against a number of common opponents. They are just too close to being = against each other. Of course i could run them with 2 CPUs each with ponder OFF, but that would have meant i could not have run another tourn. in my Shredder gui at the same time. I could never get into a so called "street fight" with you over most anything having to do with computer chess. Your knowledge is just too vast for a knucklehead like me. But i am a very good tester, mainly because i go overboard checking to make sure everything is perfect. And then i check each game before i turn it in to Ray- to make sure everything was good. I hdo hope you will look at the pgns from this match, as well as the Rybka-Naum match held first, because the Rybka Naum was on an XP box- and the latter being on Vista. I think you will see Naum likes Vista as well as he does XP. In closing- these are 2 fine engines. And they both deserve a lot of credit and are well worth the price. Best to you, Uri.