Stockfish 2.31 vs Critter 1.6
Houdini 3.0 vs Deep Rybka 4
Houdini 3.0 vs Critter 1.6
Deep Rybka 4 vs Stockfish 2.31
Deep Rybka 4 vs Critter 1.6
Houdini 3.0 vs Stockfish 2.31
Strongest kind of engines I have at the moment. There are others, strong ones that I don´t have and quite strong others that I do have, for the latter there is qualification tournament staged consisting of 14 engines with same settings used. Out of those probably top 4 placed engines will compete together with aforementioned 4 big ones in a "final" tournament of 8 engines of the strongest kind. Shall be interesting.
Well, first 4 matches have already been played and the qualification tournament is also underway, so results:
Stockfish 2.31 vs Critter 1.6 8,5 - 11,5
Quite a leveled match between these "black horses". Very interesting fight and nice games, of which altogether I selected 12/20 interesting games (with at least interesting element somewhere there) for analysis. More of that bit later. So Critter 1.6 won but with slight margin, this matchup will surely happen again. Next one however, was a true surprise.
Houdini 3.0 vs Deep Rybka 4 4,5 - 15,5
Before this I had played many many (tens of) games between these two engines with same settings, so this kind of result was totally unexpected. Deep Rybka 4 crushed Houdini 3.0! That is something. Whole 15/20 games I considered interesting to be analyzed. And there we go to next match...
Houdini 3.0 vs Critter 1.6 0,5 - 19,5
Based on previous match result, Critter 1.6 surely proved to be worthy contestant, but what is this?! It absolutely annihilated Houdini 3.0! Well that kind of thing surely reguires explanation (there were hardly any time problems or other technicalities). I suspect Houdini 3.0 does not perform to it´s limits in these settings, that seems obvious. Further matching is needed and before that Houdini 1.5 will replace the new version in coming matches and rest will be seen... What is interesting, out of this matchup I found 19/20 games to deserve closer analysis!
Deep Rybka 4 vs Stockfish 2.31 4 - 16
Another true surprise! Deep Rybka 4, the other top monster of the last many years, got severely beaten by Stockfish 2.31! Totally crushing result. Interesting games to be selected later.
Deep Rybka 4 vs Critter 1.6 7,5 - 12,5
After other results so far, this is less surprising. Critter 1.6 beat Deep Rybka 4 also comfortably, and it is now the number one favorite for the Final 8 tournament. Interesting games to be selected later.
Houdini 3.0 vs Stockfish 2.31 5 - 15
Another tough, but already expected result: Stockfish 2.31 beat Houdini 3.0 badly. Interesting games to be selected later.
Here we are. Have the newer members of the family replaced the older big guns at the top? Time will tell. This is bullet chess, which also makes things interesting and unexpected. What is the most remarkable, all the engines play very sensible AND interesting, often fascinating chess even at this kind of extreme time limit.
Follows 3 first analyzed games from the first matchup, between Stockfish 2.31 and Critter 1.6. I used Houdini 3.0 helping in analysis, where it clearly is strong performer, albeit at times bit slow in my laptop.
[Event "Stockfish 2.31 vs Critter 1.6 20 games at 1/1"]
[Site "LAPTOP of ChessCurious"]
[Date "2013.01.10"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Stockfish-231-32-ja"]
[Black "Critter_1.6_32bit"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO "E14d"]
[BlackType "program"]
[Opening "Queen's Indian"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[Time "11:48:32"]
[TimeControl "60+1"]
[Variation "Petrosian, 6.cxd5 exd5 7.g3"]
[WhiteType "program"]
{Analyzed by ChessCurious w/Houdini 3.0 11/1/2013}
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 e6 3.Nf3 b6 4.Nc3 Bb7 5.e3 d5 6.cxd5 exd5 7.Bb5+ c6 8.Bd3
Nbd7 9.O-O Be7 10.Qc2 c5 11.Ne5 O-O 12.f4 a6 13.Bd2 b5 14.a3 g6 15.Be1 Qb6
16.Bf2 Nxe5 17.dxe5 Ng4 18.e4 Nxf2 19.Qxf2 d4 20.Nd5 Qd8 21.Nxe7+ Qxe7 22.
b3 Rac8 23.Rac1 Qe6 24.Qc2 Rc7 25.a4 Qc6 26.Qa2 Re8 27.Rf2 Rec8
After 27...Rec8
Massive centralication of forces by Critter, making use of
the deadly pawn majority at the queenside.
28.axb5 axb5 29.Qb2 Qe6 30.g3 Kg7 31.Rfc2 h5 32.Qa3 h4 33.Rg2 c4!-+
Breakthrough. Black already had better position for some
Breakthrough. Black already had better position for some
time and was winning according to Houdini.
34.Qd6 cxd3! 35.Rxc7 Rxc7 36.Qxc7 Qg4?? =
Critter is SO aggressive! This however, is too much.
Houdini also was playing this up till depth 16 thou...
( 36...Bxe4 was crushing.)
37.h3??
But it pays off! This is even bigger blunder... actually overlooking
a mate threat!
( 37.Rd2 was drawing.)
37...Qd1+ -+
( 37...Qxh3?? would be actually draw so Stockfish was just
countertrapping!)
(Houdini gives the following line: 37...Qxh3 38.e6 Qxe6 39.Qxb7 d2
40.Rxd2 Qxb3 41.gxh4 Qe3+ 42.Rf2 Qg3+ 43.Kf1 Qh3+ 44.Rg2 Qf3+ 45.Rf2
Qh3+ 46.Rg2 Qh1+ 47.Kf2 Qxh4+ =
ANALYSIS POSITION
and black has perpetual
and black has perpetual
which white king cannot escape.)
38.Kh2 hxg3+! 39.Kxg3 Qe1+ 40.Kh2 Qxe4
After 40...Qxe4
Oops.
41.Qxb7 0-1 (Arena adjudication.)
[Event "Stockfish 2.31 vs Critter 1.6 20 games at 1/1"]
[Site "LAPTOP of ChessCurious"]
[Date "2013.01.10"]
[Round "3"]
[White "Stockfish-231-32-ja"]
[Black "Critter_1.6_32bit"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO "B80j"]
[BlackType "program"]
[Opening "Sicilian"]
[PlyCount "81"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[Time "11:58:50"]
[TimeControl "60+1"]
[Variation "Scheveningen, English, 7...b5, 8.Qd2 Bb7"]
[WhiteType "program"]
{Analyzed by ChessCurious w/Houdini 3.0 11/1/2013}
1.e4 c5 2.Nf3 d6 3.d4 cxd4 4.Nxd4 Nf6 5.Nc3 a6 6.f3 e6 7.Be3 b5 8.a3 e5 9.
Nb3 Bb7 10.Qd2 Be7 11.O-O-O h5 12.Kb1 Nbd7 13.h3 Qc7 14.Be2 h4 15.Bg5 Rd8
16.Qe3 Nf8 17.Qa7 Ne6 18.Bxf6 Bxf6 19.Na5 Qxa5 20.Qxb7 O-O
Well, Sicilian Najdorf and opposite side castlings does
always sound promising... perhaps even more so in nowadays engine
matches.
21.Nd5 Rb8 22.Nxf6+ gxf6 23.Qe7?
White´s attack is too slow!
White´s attack is too slow!
(Better was 23.Qd5 Rfc8 24.c3 Nf4 25.Qd2 Qb6 26.Rhe1 = (g2-pawn
being taboo. Perhaps Stockfish considered this too passive thou
especially for bullet.)
23...b4! -+ 24.a4?
(24.Rd5 was better)
24...b3 25.cxb3 Rxb3 26.Bc4
( 26.Qxd6 better thou doesn´t help much either.)
26...Rxb2+!
Crashing through.
27.Kxb2 Qb4+ 28.Bb3 Nc5 29.Qxd6 Qxb3+ 30.Ka1 Qxa4+ 31.Kb1 Qb3+ 32.Ka1 Rb8
Mate or date.
33.Qxb8+ Qxb8 34.Rb1 Qd8 35.Rb2 Nd3 36.Rc2 Qd4+ 37.Kb1 Qb4+ 38.Ka1 Qa3+
39.Ra2 Qc3+ 40.Kb1 a5!
41.f4 0-1 (Arena adjudication.)
Total and very easy-looking annihilation by
Total and very easy-looking annihilation by
Critter!
[Event "Stockfish 2.31 vs Critter 1.6 20 games at 1/1"]
[Site "LAPTOP of ChessCurious"]
[Date "2013.01.10"]
[Round "4"]
[White "Critter_1.6_32bit"]
[Black "Stockfish-231-32-ja"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo ""]
[BlackElo ""]
[ECO "B22m"]
[BlackType "program"]
[Opening "Sicilian"]
[PlyCount "156"]
[Termination "time forfeit"]
[Time "12:02:35"]
[TimeControl "60+1"]
[Variation "Alapin, 2...d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 Nc6 5.Nf3 cxd4 6.cxd4"]
[WhiteType "program"]
{Analyzed by ChessCurious w/Houdini 3.0 11/1/2013}
1.e4 c5 2.c3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.d4 e6 5.Nf3 Nf6 6.Be3 cxd4 7.cxd4 Be7 8.Nc3
Qa5 9.Bd3 Nc6 10.O-O O-O 11.a3 Bd7 12.b4 Qc7 13.Rc1 a6 14.Ne5!?
Again, Critter seeks active play by offering pawn.
(Now the "human continuation" 14...Nxe5? 15.dxe5? would lead
into 15...Qxe5 16.Bd4! Qh5 17.Bxf6 Qxd1 18.Bxh7+! Kxh7 19.Rfxd1 Bxf6
20.Rxd7 {and position is much dryer, thou after} 20...Rfd8 21.Rxd8
Rxd8 22.Rd1
ANALYSIS POSITION
black is the one who has some edge thanks to
black is the one who has some edge thanks to
the better minor piece and pawn structure.)
(But white wouldn´t have to take back immediately: 15.Nd5!
ANALYSIS POSITION
This was Critter´s idea! Black is
This was Critter´s idea! Black is
forced to take and lose the queen. 15...Nxd5 16.Rxc7 Nxc7 17.dxe5
Nd5 18.Qb1 h6 +-)
14...Rfc8 15.Ne4
Continuing the offer. Both white knights are now untouchable.
15...Be8 16.Nxf6+ Bxf6 17.f4 Qd8 18.Be4 Be7 19.f5 Nxe5 20.dxe5 Rxc1 21.
Qxc1 Rc8 22.Qb1 Rc3 23.Rd1 Qc7 24.Bd4 Rxa3 25.f6!
25...gxf6 26.Bxh7+ Kh8
Stockfish has defended accurately but Critter still has the edge.
27.Qb2!
( 27.exf6 was possible but leads only into equality: 27...Bd6 28.Qg6! Bxh2+ 29.Kh1 fxg6 30.f7+ Kxh7 31.fxe8=Q Be5 32.Bb2! Re3! 33.
Rd7+ Kh6
ANALYSIS POSITION
Now black queen is taboo because of back rank
Now black queen is taboo because of back rank
mate. 34.Qf8+ Kg5 35.Qe7+ Kg4 36.Qxe6+ Kg5 37.Qe7+ perpetual. Quite
flashy thou!)
27...Ra2
Forced.
( 27...Ra4? would be worse: 28.Qe2! and Houdini variation
28...Bc5
( 28...Rxb4? 29.Qh5! and mate in 10.)
29.Bxc5
( 29.bxc5 is also good but)
( 29.exf6? loses 29...Bxd4+ 30.Rxd4 Ra1+ 31.Kf2 Qc3 32.Rh4
Qxf6+ 33.Kg3 Ra3+ 34.Bd3+ Kg8 -+
ANALYSIS POSITION
white´s attack has
white´s attack has
ended.)
29...Qxe5 30.Be4 Ra1 31.Rxa1 Qxa1+ 32.Kf2 Qe5 33.Bxb7
ANALYSIS POSITION
white
white
wins.)
28.Qxa2 fxe5 29.Qc2!
Forces queen exchange.
29...Qxc2 30.Bxc2 exd4 31.Rxd4 +-
31...Kg7 32.Rg4+ Kf8 33.Kf2 f5 34.Rc4 Bd6 35.Bd1 b5 36.Rd4 Be7 37.Rf4 Bd6
38.Rh4 Kg7 39.Rd4 Be7 40.g4 Kf6 41.gxf5 exf5 42.Ke3 Bf7 43.Be2 Bf8 44.Kf4
Bh6+ 45.Kg3 Bf8 46.h4 Be6 47.h5 Kg5 48.Bf3 Bf7 49.Rd7 Bxh5 50.Bxh5 Kxh5
51.Kf4 Kg6 52.Ra7 Bd6+ 53.Kf3 Bxb4 54.Rxa6+ Kg5 55.Rb6 Be7 56.Rb7 Kf6 57.
Rxb5 Ke6 58.Rb2 Bd6 59.Rb6 Ke5 60.Rb1 f4?!
(60...Bf8 by Houdini would have been better. However, how could
white break through anyway? And indeed, tablebases tell this is draw.)
61.Rb5+ Kd4 62.Rg5 Bb4 63.Rh5 Bd2 64.Rh6 Ke5 65.Rh8 Be3 66.Rh2 Kd4 67.Rh1
Ke5 68.Re1 Kf5 69.Re2 Ke5 70.Rc2 Bd4 71.Rh2 Be3 72.Rh1 Bd2 73.Rh7 Be3 74.
Rd7 Bc5 75.Rd8 Be3 76.Rh8 Kd4 77.Rg8 Kd5 78.Re8 Bc1 0-1
Because white forfeits on time... How bad ending for Critter after it had
played so energetically! Well bullet is bullet after all even for
computer engines...
More results, games & analysis later...
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti