2008 Second Annual World Computer Rapid Chess Championships

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:39 pm

Rybka drew with Bugchess in the last round which stopped its attempt to get 14/14

Final standings:

13.5 Rybka
10.0 Sjeng Hiarcs8x
9.5 TerraPi
9.0 TwistedLogic
8.5 Frenzee
8.0 DIEP crafty Bugchess2 ChessThinkerX
7.5 Amateur Deuterium2003 zct
7.0 ArasanX TheGiver Yace PetirX messchess Buzz
6.5 Telepath Tinker Symbolic DeltomateX Matilde
6.0 Tornado-C Horizon-x Timea NeurosisX ProphetX OxygenX
5.5 apocalypse1112
5.0 BertaX
4.5 JokerX
4.0 HfC
2.0 NoonianChess
0.5 roce

Dr.Wael Deeb · Post by **Dr.Wael Deeb** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:46 pm

Bravo,an excellent achievement,taking in consideration that the new Sjeng is a huge improvement by itself

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Sun Jun 22, 2008 8:55 pm

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Bravo,an excellent achievement,taking in consideration that the new Sjeng is a huge improvement by itself

Thanks wael. A strange tournament +6 -2 yesterday and +2 =4 today. I think the biggest problem was to many draws today.

Dr.Wael Deeb · Post by **Dr.Wael Deeb** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 6:03 pm

Harvey Williamson wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:Bravo,an excellent achievement,taking in consideration that the new Sjeng is a huge improvement by itself
Thanks wael. A strange tournament +6 -2 yesterday and +2 =4 today. I think the biggest problem was to many draws today.

The same thought has crossed my mind and the funny thing is that most of these draws are against amateur engines....

DarienSar · Post by **DarienSar** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:26 pm

Harvey,

Didn't DIEP win against Hiarcs in the last tournament (CSVN I think it was), too? Is there something special about DIEP, or is it just the usual stats disclaimer "too few games to draw proper conclusions"?

Darien

Vempele · Post by **Vempele** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:30 pm

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:The same thought has crossed my mind and the funny thing is that most of these draws are against amateur engines....

That's because there were only two other non-amateur engines participating...

Dr.Wael Deeb · Post by **Dr.Wael Deeb** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 7:45 pm

Vempele wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:The same thought has crossed my mind and the funny thing is that most of these draws are against amateur engines....
That's because there were only two other non-amateur engines participating...

Hehe,now that was a good one I admit

Dylan Sharp · Post by **Dylan Sharp** » Mon Jun 23, 2008 10:22 pm

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:the funny thing is that most of these draws are against amateur engines....

I have this feeling that Hiarcs Paderborn 2007 would have performed better against these amateur engines. Perhaps it would have lost more games also, but the final score would have been higher.

Dr.Wael Deeb · Post by **Dr.Wael Deeb** » Tue Jun 24, 2008 10:57 am

Dylan Sharp wrote:
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:the funny thing is that most of these draws are against amateur engines....
I have this feeling that Hiarcs Paderborn 2007 would have performed better against these amateur engines. Perhaps it would have lost more games also, but the final score would have been higher.

We can only speculate Dylan

turbojuice1122 · Post by **turbojuice1122** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 9:45 am

DarienSar wrote:Harvey,

Didn't DIEP win against Hiarcs in the last tournament (CSVN I think it was), too? Is there something special about DIEP, or is it just the usual stats disclaimer "too few games to draw proper conclusions"?

Darien

That was a complete fluke--though a number of flukes happened in that tournament, so I wonder if the beta version used was a bit more buggy than most.

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Sat Jun 28, 2008 10:58 am

turbojuice1122 wrote:
DarienSar wrote:Harvey,

Didn't DIEP win against Hiarcs in the last tournament (CSVN I think it was), too? Is there something special about DIEP, or is it just the usual stats disclaimer "too few games to draw proper conclusions"?

Darien
That was a complete fluke--though a number of flukes happened in that tournament, so I wonder if the beta version used was a bit more buggy than most.

I am pretty certain that in a match or ssdf/ccrl/cegt tests we would beat Diep. The new Sjeng is a completely different question. One I hope to answer soon as I now have it on my 8 core machine. As it is a private version I am not sure I will be able to publish the results. It will be interesting to try it in the match v The Rybka warriors.

turbojuice1122 · Post by **turbojuice1122** » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:40 am

Harvey Williamson wrote:
I am pretty certain that in a match or ssdf/ccrl/cegt tests we would beat Diep. The new Sjeng is a completely different question. One I hope to answer soon as I now have it on my 8 core machine. As it is a private version I am not sure I will be able to publish the results. It will be interesting to try it in the match v The Rybka warriors.

I still think that we really need more of these sorts of matches at tournament time controls--they are such low maintenance compared with human matches--representatives for each side just need to get together on the Playchess server for a few days or so and duke it out. These types of matches would, I think, be of very great benefit to the computer chess community and would attract a lot of excitement for fans and participants alike. Rybka vs. Hiarcs, Hiarcs vs. Sjeng, and Rybka vs. Zappa are just a few matches like this that would seem to be high-profile matches over the Playchess server.