Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1.

[Mogens Larsen]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Mogens Larsen at 12 February 2000 12:45:27:
Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

[Event "40/100'"]
[Site "PII-266/64"]
[Date "2000.02.12"]
[Round "1"]
[White "Amy_06"]
[Black "Crafty_1708c"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "E20"]
[PlyCount "134"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. Bd2 c5 5. Nb5 O-O 6. Bxb4 cxb4 7. Nd6 Qc7 8.
c5 b6 9. e4 bxc5 10. dxc5 Ba6 11. e5 Nd5 12. Rc1 f6 13. exf6 Rxf6 14. Nf3 Bxf1
15. Kxf1 Nc6 16. Kg1 Raf8 17. Ne4 Rg6 18. g3 Qf4 19. Nfd2 Qf5 20. h4 Ne5 21.
Rh2 Nf6 22. Nd6 Qd3 23. N6c4 Nfg4 24. Nxe5 Nxe5 25. h5 Rxf2 26. Rxf2 Qxg3+ 27.
Kh1 Ng4 28. Rg2 Qh3+ 29. Kg1 Ne3 30. Rxg6 Nxd1 31. Rg2 Qe3+ 32. Kf1 Nxb2 33. c6
dxc6 34. Rxc6 Nd3 35. Re2 Qh3+ 36. Kg1 Nf4 37. Rc8+ Kf7 38. Rf2 Qg4+ 39. Kh2
Qxh5+ 40. Kg3 e5 41. Rh2 Qg6+ 42. Kf2 Nd3+ 43. Ke2 e4 44. Rc7+ Ke8 45. Rc4 Qg4+
46. Ke3 Qf4+ 47. Kd4 Qxh2 48. Nxe4 Ne5 49. Rc8+ Kd7 50. Rf8 Ng4 51. Rf7+ Kc6
52. Re7 Qxa2 53. Kd3 b3 54. Re8 Nf2+ 55. Nxf2 Qxf2 56. Rc8+ Kb5 57. Rc3 Qf5+
58. Ke2 b2 59. Rb3+ Kc4 60. Rxb2 Qe5+ 61. Kd2 Qxb2+ 62. Ke3 Qg2 63. Kf4 Kd4 64.
Kf5 Qe4+ 65. Kg5 Qf3 66. Kh4 h5 67. Kg5 67... Qg4# {Black mates} 0-1
[Event "40/100'"]
[Site "PII-266/64"]
[Date "2000.02.12"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Crafty_1708c"]
[Black "Amy_06"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "C55"]
[PlyCount "91"]
1. e4 e5 2. Bc4 Nf6 3. d3 Nc6 4. Nf3 Be7 5. O-O O-O 6. Re1 d6 7. c3 Na5 8. Bb5
a6 9. Ba4 Be6 10. d4 exd4 11. Nxd4 Bg4 12. f3 Bd7 13. Nf5 Re8 14. Bxd7 Qxd7 15.
Qd2 d5 16. Qg5 Bf8 17. Rd1 Nc4 18. b3 Nd6 19. Nh6+ Kh8 20. e5 gxh6 21. Qxf6+
Bg7 22. Qh4 Nf5 23. Qb4 Bxe5 24. Qg4 Qe6 25. f4 Bd6 26. Bd2 Qe2 27. Qxe2 Rxe2
28. g3 Bc5+ 29. Kh1 Rg8 30. Rg1 Bxg1 31. Kxg1 h5 32. c4 d4 33. Ba5 b6 34. Bb4
a5 35. Nc3 Rc2 36. Nd5 axb4 37. Nxb4 Rd2 38. Rf1 Ne3 39. Rf3 Re8 40. h3 c5 41.
Nc6 Rd1+ 42. Kf2 Rf1+ 43. Ke2 d3+ 44. Kxd3 Rxf3 45. Ne5 Rxg3 46. Ke2 {
White resigns} 0-1

Best wishes...
Mogens

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Aaron at 12 February 2000 14:24:30:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Mogens Larsen at 12 February 2000 12:45:27:

Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

Yes. Amy looks strong ..At least as strong as say comet..
I also find Gormit quite strong..
So far in the 60 mins game match against Crafty178, Gormit is ahead by 1-0

[Dann Corbit]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Dann Corbit at 14 February 2000 21:02:33:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Aaron at 12 February 2000 14:24:30:

Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

Yes. Amy looks strong ..At least as strong as say comet..
I also find Gormit quite strong..
So far in the 60 mins game match against Crafty178, Gormit is ahead by 1-0

The slower the time control, the better Amy seems to do.
Once pondering is fixed, that should be an instant 50 ELO.
I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.


My FTP site

[Andrew Tanner]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Andrew Tanner at 14 February 2000 23:54:03:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Dann Corbit at 14 February 2000 21:02:33:

I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.

I would go as far to say that Gromit 2.20 could be easily as strong as Amy if not stronger. It would need a streamlined opening book (right now it seems to play stronger without it's book enabled especially as black), It would need to be re-compiled for optimum speed with MS compiler and the eval.cfg needs to be tweaked a great deal. For example if you double or reduce the pawn hash by 1/2 it seems to effect the playing style significantly!? I use a setup for Gromit without the opening book and with a custom config (lower hash tables..lower rook value etc.) that seems to play very strong as black. I decided to lower the rook's value (default 532) because it seemed to repeatedly be getting in rook/pawn endgames in which it would likely lose. Is it possibly overvaluing it's rook which leads it to try to hang on to it too far into the game I wonder.
[Event "Computer chess game AMDk6-266"]
[Site "Win98"]
[Date "2000.02.14"]
[Round "1"]
[White "AnMon506"]
[Black "Gromit220"]
[Result "0-1"]
[TimeControl "720"]
1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Be7 4. Bd3 dxe4 5. Nxe4 Nc6 6. Nf3 Kf8 7. c3 f5 8.
Ng3 h5 9. Ne2 g5 10. O-O h4 11. Bb5 h3 12. Bxc6 bxc6 13. Ne5 hxg2 14. Kxg2
Rh7 15. f4 g4 16. Kg1 Bd6 17. Qa4 c5 18. Qc6 Rb8 19. Rf2 Nf6 20. dxc5 Bxe5
21. fxe5 Qd1+ 22. Kg2 Kg8 23. Nd4 Bb7 24. Qxb7 Rxb7 25. Nxf5 exf5 26. exf6
Qd5+ 27. Kg3 Rh3+ 28. Kf4 Kf7 29. c6 Kxf6 30. Bd2
{White resigns} 0-1
[Event "Computer chess game AMDk6-266"]
[Site "Win98"]
[Date "2000.02.14"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Gromit220"]
[Black "AnMon506"]
[Result "0-1"]
[TimeControl "720"]
1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. d4 exd4 4. Nxd4 Bc5 5. Nb3 Bb6 6. Bd3 Qh4 7. O-O Nf6
8. Qf3 O-O 9. Nc3 d6 10. Qf4 Qxf4 11. Bxf4 Nb4 12. Bg5 Ng4 13. Nd5 Nxd5 14.
exd5 Ne5 15. a4 a5 16. Rfe1 Nxd3 17. cxd3 Bf5 18. d4 Rfe8 19. Rxe8+ Rxe8
20. Bd2 Be4 21. Re1 Kf8 22. Bc3 Bxd5 23. Rxe8+ Kxe8 24. Nxa5 Ke7 25. h4 c5
26. dxc5 dxc5 27. b4 cxb4 28. Bxb4+ Ke6 29. Bc3 g6 30. g4 Bc5 31. Nxb7 Bxb7
32. a5 h5 33. gxh5 gxh5 34. Bd2 Be7 35. Be3 Bxh4 36. Kh2 Bf6 37. Bb6 Kd5
38. Kh3 Bc8+ 39. Kg2 h4 40. f4 h3+ 41. Kh2 Kc6 42. Kg3 Bc3 43. Bd8 Bd2 44.
Bg5 Bxa5 45. Bf6 Bc7 46. Bg5 Kd5 47. Kh2 Ke4 48. Kg3 Ke3 49. Kh2 Bxf4+ 50.
Bxf4+ Kxf4 51. Kg1 Kf3 52. Kf1 h2 53. Ke1 h1=Q+ 54. Kd2
{White resigns} 0-1
[Event "Computer chess game AMDk6-266"]
[Site "Win98"]
[Date "2000.02.14"]
[Round "3"]
[White "AnMon506"]
[Black "Gromit220"]
[Result "0-1"]
[TimeControl "720"]
1. Nf3 d5 2. d4 Nf6 3. c4 e6 4. Nc3 Ne4 5. Qb3 dxc4 6. Qxc4 Nxc3 7. bxc3
Be7 8. e4 O-O 9. Bf4 c6 10. Be2 b6 11. Qa4 b5 12. Qc2 Nd7 13. O-O Nb6 14.
Rab1 Bb7 15. Rfc1 a5 16. c4 bxc4 17. Qb2 Bb4 18. a3 c5 19. axb4 cxb4 20. e5
Rc8 21. Bg5 Qd7 22. Qa2 Ra8 23. Bxc4 Be4 24. Ra1 Bxf3 25. gxf3 Rfc8 26. Be3
a4 27. Bd3 Rab8 28. Rxc8+ Rxc8 29. Qb1 b3 30. Bxh7+ Kf8 31. Bd3 Qc6 32. Kg2
Qd7 33. f4 Nd5 34. f5 Nc3 35. Qb2 exf5 36. f3 Kg8 37. Qd2 Nd5 38. Bg5 Rb8
39. Qb2 Rb6 40. Kg3 Rg6 41. h4 f6 42. Qb1 Ne7 43. Bc4+ Kh8 44. Bf7 fxg5 45.
Bxg6 gxh4+ 46. Kxh4 Qxd4+ 47. Kh5 Qf4 48. Bxf5 Nxf5 49. Rxa4 Ng3+ 50. Kg6
Qxa4 51. Kg5 Qa2 52. Qd3 Qc2 53. Qd7 Qf5+ 54. Qxf5 Nxf5 55. Kxf5 b2 56. Kg5
b1=Q 57. Kf4
{White resigns} 0-1

[Dann Corbit]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Dann Corbit at 15 February 2000 01:13:58:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1.----what about Gromit? geschrieben von:/posted by: Andrew Tanner at 14 February 2000 23:54:03:
My original quote:

I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard programs for which source code is available,

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
with Phalanx also being close to these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Aaron at 15 February 2000 07:15:46:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1.----what about Gromit? geschrieben von:/posted by: Andrew Tanner at 14 February 2000 23:54:03:

I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard >>programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to >>these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.

I would go as far to say that Gromit 2.20 could be easily as strong as Amy if >not stronger. It would need a streamlined opening book (right now it seems to >play stronger without it's book enabled especially as black .

That seems to be the problem with most non-comerce programs..Based on what was posted on the newsticker, both Comet and Gromit tend to get into trouble because of bad opening lines or bugs..
I wished I was a better chessplayer , such that I could help hand tune a opening book for the programs ..but I'm only a weak chessplayer..

[Aaron]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Aaron at 15 February 2000 08:02:35:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Dann Corbit at 14 February 2000 21:02:33:

Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

Yes. Amy looks strong ..At least as strong as say comet..
I also find Gormit quite strong..
So far in the 60 mins game match against Crafty178, Gormit is ahead by 1-0

The slower the time control, the better Amy seems to do.
Once pondering is fixed, that should be an instant 50 ELO.
I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard >programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to >these in strength.
Extensive testing will tell the real story.

Doesn't affect me..

Amy is not too bad at Blitz ,either I've found..Against Crafty it loses around 7-3 which makes it close to the others top winboard programs..

But Crafty is just too dominant (against all other winboard programs ,so far Crafty has won all my Blitz matches up to 80 games EACH against selected chess engines like Goliath,TCB etc by a margain of 20 points or so..) at Blitz on my computer, but much less so at Rapid and standard time controls..Admittedly I haven't tested longer time controls as much..But I'm working on that now..

[Alexandre Côme]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Alexandre Côme at 15 February 2000 13:12:01:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Dann Corbit at 14 February 2000 21:02:33:

Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

Yes. Amy looks strong ..At least as strong as say comet..
I also find Gormit quite strong..
So far in the 60 mins game match against Crafty178, Gormit is ahead by 1-0

The slower the time control, the better Amy seems to do.
Once pondering is fixed, that should be an instant 50 ELO.
I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.

Hello Dann,
I don't agree !
Amy is very weak positionally even in slow games !
Best Regards
Alexandre Côme

[Dann Corbit]

Geschrieben von:/Posted by: Dann Corbit at 15 February 2000 19:29:49:
Als Antwort auf:/As an answer to: Re: Test. Amy 0.6-Crafty 17.08c: 1-1. geschrieben von:/posted by: Alexandre Côme at 15 February 2000 13:12:01:

Here are the two games (40 moves in 100 min.). Interesting win for Amy.

Yes. Amy looks strong ..At least as strong as say comet..
I also find Gormit quite strong..
So far in the 60 mins game match against Crafty178, Gormit is ahead by 1-0

The slower the time control, the better Amy seems to do.
Once pondering is fixed, that should be an instant 50 ELO.
I think it is clear that Amy and Crafty are the two strongest winboard programs for which source code is available, with Phalanx also being close to these in strength. Extensive testing will tell the real story.

Hello Dann,
I don't agree !
Amy is very weak positionally even in slow games !

I can tell by some of the things that you have written that you are quite an expert in the game of chess, so I do not doubt your positional assessment. Yet Amy does well in my tests, and tactically, it is very fast. Perhaps it is a program that can be crushed by a human who knows how to play positionally. But most programs know very little of position. I think in 40/2 time format, Amy will do surprisingly well against other programs.
The author has discovered a couple bugs at the recent tournament. Once those are fixed, there may be another good increase in strength. Pondering will help too, as it is almost a 2x speed boost under some circumstances.


My FTP site