Old Rating Lists
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Old Rating Lists
Here is a nice list from 1992 that I thought I would share since it also shows Mainframe computers, DOS programs and some rarities like Peri Epsilon.
This list came from this Spanish website below and was created in December 1992.
http://www.anacadigital.com/dedicados/listaelo1992.html
1992 Rating List
I thought I'd share it for those of you who may have never seen it.
Best regards
This list came from this Spanish website below and was created in December 1992.
http://www.anacadigital.com/dedicados/listaelo1992.html
1992 Rating List
I thought I'd share it for those of you who may have never seen it.
Best regards
Nick
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
- Fernando
- Admiral of the Fleet
- Posts: 3059
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
- Location: Santiago de Chile
I commented that because in those years I played some of those engines and I remember well my wins and losses, but now, when playing the same in a far faster computer, the experience is excruciating. As I told in a post some weeks ago, a program like chess 2150 which appears, in those old years, as a 1700 something engine, now running in my modest but lot faster computer than a 486 gave me a difficult job to get the point. I would say he is now at least 150-200 points stronger.spacious_mind wrote:I don't know, the list is a very interesting piece of history, but it misses a lot of good information as well.Fernando wrote:I wonder how many elo points won those engines that appears as measured with 386 or 486 processors.
Fern
Best regards
Fern
Festina Lente
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Well you are right about that, there is improvement for sure. Here are a couple of tournament results that I played in 2012, which you should find interesting because some good oldie DOS programs played in it:Fernando wrote:I commented that because in those years I played some of those engines and I remember well my wins and losses, but now, when playing the same in a far faster computer, the experience is excruciating. As I told in a post some weeks ago, a program like chess 2150 which appears, in those old years, as a 1700 something engine, now running in my modest but lot faster computer than a 486 gave me a difficult job to get the point. I would say he is now at least 150-200 points stronger.spacious_mind wrote:I don't know, the list is a very interesting piece of history, but it misses a lot of good information as well.Fernando wrote:I wonder how many elo points won those engines that appears as measured with 386 or 486 processors.
Fern
Best regards
Fern
In this first tournament I had slowed down Mysticum to what I thought was an equivalent speed of a 68020 with 40 MHz. Whether it was exactly an equivalent really does not matter, what was important for me was to find a setting that allows classic engine programs to play with dedicated computers and DOS programs.
As you can see it worked really well. Prodeo 1.6 from Ed Schroeder was the engine that was slowed down. You can also see that I used different DOS computers, an 80286-10 MHz, a 80386SX-16 MHz and a 486-133 MHz. It wasn't Chess Player 2150 that played but Chess Champion 2175 which was the follower of Chess Player 2150. Also notice I included out of interest an old Home computer, the Amstrad CPC 464 that is a Z80 with 4 MHz playing Cyrus which performed badly
Anyway W-Chess on the 386 won it ahead of Prodeo 1.6 and Chessmaster 2100. The dedicated computer Scysys Stratos from Juio Kaplan finished 4th.
Anway since this worked so well and I had so much fun with it, I then did another tournament:
This one was even more exciting then the first with King 3.5 (Chessmaster 11 engine with Brucha (Witch) a configuration that I had created on CM9000 many years ago that I play with all the time cause I like it) winning it at the same equivalent speed of 68020-40 MHz with Mysticum. With this tournament I had even more fun because 5 programs that included 2 dedicated computers battled it out to the last round and the winner was only settled in the last round.
From this one you can see that Cyrus on a P100 performed at ELO 2047. But the Complete Chess System (Chris Whittington) playing on Commodore Amiga was disappointing.
Anyway I think this shows you as well that with improved hardware you can get better ELO's.
You are not wrong.
Best regards
Nick
- Fernando
- Admiral of the Fleet
- Posts: 3059
- Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
- Location: Santiago de Chile
Thanks for the post. Of course I already knew a faster comp gives better results to any program, BUT the point is HOW much better they becomes.spacious_mind wrote:Well you are right about that, there is improvement for sure. Here are a couple of tournament results that I played in 2012, which you should find interesting because some good oldie DOS programs played in it:Fernando wrote:I commented that because in those years I played some of those engines and I remember well my wins and losses, but now, when playing the same in a far faster computer, the experience is excruciating. As I told in a post some weeks ago, a program like chess 2150 which appears, in those old years, as a 1700 something engine, now running in my modest but lot faster computer than a 486 gave me a difficult job to get the point. I would say he is now at least 150-200 points stronger.spacious_mind wrote:I don't know, the list is a very interesting piece of history, but it misses a lot of good information as well.Fernando wrote:I wonder how many elo points won those engines that appears as measured with 386 or 486 processors.
Fern
Best regards
Fern
In this first tournament I had slowed down Mysticum to what I thought was an equivalent speed of a 68020 with 40 MHz. Whether it was exactly an equivalent really does not matter, what was important for me was to find a setting that allows classic engine programs to play with dedicated computers and DOS programs.
As you can see it worked really well. Prodeo 1.6 from Ed Schroeder was the engine that was slowed down. You can also see that I used different DOS computers, an 80286-10 MHz, a 80386SX-16 MHz and a 486-133 MHz. It wasn't Chess Player 2150 that played but Chess Champion 2175 which was the follower of Chess Player 2150. Also notice I included out of interest an old Home computer, the Amstrad CPC 464 that is a Z80 with 4 MHz playing Cyrus which performed badly
Anyway W-Chess on the 386 won it ahead of Prodeo 1.6 and Chessmaster 2100. The dedicated computer Scysys Stratos from Juio Kaplan finished 4th.
Anway since this worked so well and I had so much fun with it, I then did another tournament:
This one was even more exciting then the first with King 3.5 (Chessmaster 11 engine with Brucha (Witch) a configuration that I had created on CM9000 many years ago that I play with all the time cause I like it) winning it at the same equivalent speed of 68020-40 MHz with Mysticum. With this tournament I had even more fun because 5 programs that included 2 dedicated computers battled it out to the last round and the winner was only settled in the last round.
From this one you can see that Cyrus on a P100 performed at ELO 2047. But the Complete Chess System (Chris Whittington) playing on Commodore Amiga was disappointing.
Anyway I think this shows you as well that with improved hardware you can get better ELO's.
You are not wrong.
Best regards
I have a 4 gig RAM with a dual core 3 MHz speed comp and certainly even antiques like some of those you mention gives a strong game at least until the middle game.
Of course there is another Elo rating that changes with time; ours...
At 66 years of age certainly my concentration capabilities has deteriorated, although at the same time experience is far greater than that of those years.
Festina Lente
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Yes I know what you are asking. But it is hard to know. Someone would have to for example take an Intel i7 empty and load DOS 6.22 onto it assuming you can still load DOS on them (which maybe you can't anymore) and then you can load these DOS programs at full speed and see where they really are today. DOSBox cannot give you that same experience as you don't really know the speed that they are playing through this emulator and you are not achieving max computer speed to allow you to compare with engines at the same speed on the same computer.Fernando wrote:Thanks for the post. Of course I already knew a faster comp gives better results to any program, BUT the point is HOW much better they becomes.spacious_mind wrote:Well you are right about that, there is improvement for sure. Here are a couple of tournament results that I played in 2012, which you should find interesting because some good oldie DOS programs played in it:Fernando wrote:I commented that because in those years I played some of those engines and I remember well my wins and losses, but now, when playing the same in a far faster computer, the experience is excruciating. As I told in a post some weeks ago, a program like chess 2150 which appears, in those old years, as a 1700 something engine, now running in my modest but lot faster computer than a 486 gave me a difficult job to get the point. I would say he is now at least 150-200 points stronger.spacious_mind wrote:I don't know, the list is a very interesting piece of history, but it misses a lot of good information as well.Fernando wrote:I wonder how many elo points won those engines that appears as measured with 386 or 486 processors.
Fern
Best regards
Fern
In this first tournament I had slowed down Mysticum to what I thought was an equivalent speed of a 68020 with 40 MHz. Whether it was exactly an equivalent really does not matter, what was important for me was to find a setting that allows classic engine programs to play with dedicated computers and DOS programs.
As you can see it worked really well. Prodeo 1.6 from Ed Schroeder was the engine that was slowed down. You can also see that I used different DOS computers, an 80286-10 MHz, a 80386SX-16 MHz and a 486-133 MHz. It wasn't Chess Player 2150 that played but Chess Champion 2175 which was the follower of Chess Player 2150. Also notice I included out of interest an old Home computer, the Amstrad CPC 464 that is a Z80 with 4 MHz playing Cyrus which performed badly
Anyway W-Chess on the 386 won it ahead of Prodeo 1.6 and Chessmaster 2100. The dedicated computer Scysys Stratos from Juio Kaplan finished 4th.
Anway since this worked so well and I had so much fun with it, I then did another tournament:
This one was even more exciting then the first with King 3.5 (Chessmaster 11 engine with Brucha (Witch) a configuration that I had created on CM9000 many years ago that I play with all the time cause I like it) winning it at the same equivalent speed of 68020-40 MHz with Mysticum. With this tournament I had even more fun because 5 programs that included 2 dedicated computers battled it out to the last round and the winner was only settled in the last round.
From this one you can see that Cyrus on a P100 performed at ELO 2047. But the Complete Chess System (Chris Whittington) playing on Commodore Amiga was disappointing.
Anyway I think this shows you as well that with improved hardware you can get better ELO's.
You are not wrong.
Best regards
I have a 4 gig RAM with a dual core 3 MHz speed comp and certainly even antiques like some of those you mention gives a strong game at least until the middle game.
Of course there is another Elo rating that changes with time; ours...
At 66 years of age certainly my concentration capabilities has deteriorated, although at the same time experience is far greater than that of those years.
Best regards
Nick
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Thanks I will give it a try. I have never used it.Fernando wrote:D-Fend as a way to run DOS programs gives you some options in terms of RAM, processor speed or dedication, etc.
It is a wonderful program, lot better that the usual dosbox.
Give it a try IF you does not know it already.
Fern
Regards
Nick
- spacious_mind
- Senior Member
- Posts: 4018
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
- Location: Alabama
- Contact:
Hi Peter,Fluppio wrote:Very nice list Nick. Some dedicated were never mentioned before in a list, like Bogol 5.0, TSB IV etc.
But the most astonishing is No. 127!!
Playmate Bunny regards
Peter
Thanks, I thought it was worth sharing. btw.. you are doing a fantastic job with your blog. Really nice reports and photos.
Best regards
Nick
-
- Full Member
- Posts: 865
- Joined: Sun Mar 13, 2016 2:24 am
- Location: Kingsport, TN
That's a great list. Back when there were still a few humans who could beat the best AI at chess!
I like how they mixed the different formats of chess playing-entities. Notice how the PC chess programs are 1,000 ELO points weaker than they are now!
Looks like the best PC chess was Gideon. That was the forerunner to the REBEL software, right? The second place PC chess was The King, which was later used in the Chessmaster series, if I'm not mistaken.
I recently downloaded D-Fend and all those old DOS chess programs from Ed Schroeder's wonderful site. I'm looking forward to matching some of them against my Dedicated units once I finish the current tournament.
I like how they mixed the different formats of chess playing-entities. Notice how the PC chess programs are 1,000 ELO points weaker than they are now!
Looks like the best PC chess was Gideon. That was the forerunner to the REBEL software, right? The second place PC chess was The King, which was later used in the Chessmaster series, if I'm not mistaken.
I recently downloaded D-Fend and all those old DOS chess programs from Ed Schroeder's wonderful site. I'm looking forward to matching some of them against my Dedicated units once I finish the current tournament.
Sure you can. Install FreeDOS (http://www.freedos.org/) on a USB stick and fill it with DOS oldies. Boot from the USB stick, and you have DOS running full speed on a modern computer.spacious_mind wrote:Yes I know what you are asking. But it is hard to know. Someone would have to for example take an Intel i7 empty and load DOS 6.22 onto it assuming you can still load DOS on them (which maybe you can't anymore)
Thank you for an interesting game.
As long as we are talking about comparative strength of chess programs running on anything Pentium and down you may find this old clip interesting:Fernando wrote:I wonder how many elo points won those engines that appears as measured with 386 or 486 processors.
Source: Computer Chess Reports http://www.chesscomputeruk.com/CCR_Volu ... dum_01.pdf
Thank you for an interesting game.