| |
Main
Date: 08 Jul 2008 23:45:42
From: Sanny
Subject: Tough Game against Rybka.
|
Today again game was improved, So GetClub will play twice Stronger.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After improvement I had a match of Easy level against Rybka.
GetClub was able to see a trap and saved itself by not taking the pawn
with the Queen.
Game Played between Rybka and easy at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rybka: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22153&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(Rybka) -- (easy)
1. d2-d4{10} Ng8-f6{0}
2. Ng1-f3{10} g7-g6{0}
3. g2-g3{12} Bf8-g7{0}
4. Bf1-g2{10} Ke8-g8{0}
5. Ke1-g1{12} d7-d5{48}
6. c2-c4{14} Nf6-e4{42}
7. c4-d5{18} f7-f6{148}
8. Qd1-b3{18} Rf8-e8{210}
9. Nb1-c3{40} Ne4-c3{34}
10. b2-c3{18} Kg8-h8{44}
11. Rf1-e1{18} b7-b6{40}
12. e2-e4{16} Bc8-g4{64}
13. a2-a4{18} Nb8-d7{80}
14. h2-h3{18} Bg4-f3{38}
15. Bg2-f3{14} g6-g5{40}
16. Qb3-c4{24} a7-a6{44}
17. Bf3-g4{22} Nd7-f8{102}
18. Bc1-a3{18} Ra8-a7{46}
19. Ra1-b1{18} Nf8-g6{28}
20. a4-a5{30} b6-b5{22}
21. Qc4-c5{18} Qd8-a8{76}
22. Bg4-d7{30} Re8-f8{146}
23. c3-c4{16} g5-g4{46}
24. Bd7-c6{22} Ra7-b7{32}
25. h3-g4{20} Bg7-h6{38}
26. Bc6-b7{22} Qa8-b7{50}
27. f2-f4{2} Qb7-c8{30}
28. f4-f5{24} Bh6-d2{108}
29. f5-g6{20} Rf8-g8{104}
30. Qc5-e7{20} Rg8-g6{78}
31. Re1-d1{18} Bd2-e3{20}
32. Kg1-g2{16} Qc8-g4{44}
33. Qe7-f8{16} Rg6-g8{0}
34. Qf8-f6{16} Rg8-g7{24}
35. Qf6-f3{16} Be3-f4{72}
36. Qf3-g4{22} Rg7-g4{46}
37. Kg2-f3{2} Rg4-g3{126}
38. Kf3-f4{26} Rg3-a3{34}
39. c4-b5{2} Ra3-a5{44}
40. Rd1-c1{18} a6-b5{24}
41. Rc1-c7{18} h7-h6{144}
42. d5-d6{22} Ra5-a4{64}
43. d6-d7{22} Ra4-a8{38}
44. Rc7-c8{16} Kh8-h7{224}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rybka: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22153&game=Chess
I find most of the moves made by GetClub were forced move.
In this game GetClub was never free to do anything. Rybka keep
attacking various pieces and Easy Level was only defending its pieces.
But slowly its pieces got trapped.
And in end Rybka got the Queens and win. You can see how good GetClub
played despite such horrible positions.
Now easy level will be very tough for Help Bot to win.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
|
| |
Date: 16 Jul 2008 17:23:23
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 12, 10:47 am, Patrick Volk <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:24:23 -0700 (PDT), help bot
> >> At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
> > The bug which prevented GC from loading
> >its Java applet has been corrected. Maybe
> >your system is just messed up?
> >> I must be getting twice stupid every time by carrying on playing
> >> against this thing, can't explain any other way why I bothered to
> >> return.
> > Try this experiment: read some of Dr.
> >IMnes' postings to rgc; if they now seem
> >to make sense to you, you have indeed
> >been dumbed-down just as you suspect.
> So, now we're down to blaming the user.
Sanny asserted that the user's problem
was caused by him having too many
browsers open at the same time-- a mere
guess, IMO.
> System is messed up or too
> many windows. Yep, good business practice, with good programming
> practice.
Standard business practice? "Call tech
support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
provide tech support", etc.
> You think chess is the only game in town with tactics?
Who is this mysterious "you"?
> Programming can
> get highly tactical (although it's more like poker in it's tactics -
> you play the person, and you have incomplete information)
Poker has hidden cards, whereas in chess,
everything is out in the open; this makes
the two games quite different in nature.
> Methinks you like being a sockpuppet.
You probably went wrong at the very first word
in that sentence. In chess, you went wrong
when you sat down to play... .
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 16 Jul 2008 21:22:18
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 17:23:23 -0700 (PDT), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Jul 12, 10:47 am, Patrick Volk <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:24:23 -0700 (PDT), help bot
>
>> >> At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
>
>> > The bug which prevented GC from loading
>> >its Java applet has been corrected. Maybe
>> >your system is just messed up?
>
>> >> I must be getting twice stupid every time by carrying on playing
>> >> against this thing, can't explain any other way why I bothered to
>> >> return.
>
>> > Try this experiment: read some of Dr.
>> >IMnes' postings to rgc; if they now seem
>> >to make sense to you, you have indeed
>> >been dumbed-down just as you suspect.
>
>> So, now we're down to blaming the user.
>
> Sanny asserted that the user's problem
>was caused by him having too many
>browsers open at the same time-- a mere
>guess, IMO.
Based on what? That nobody else had a problem?
>
>
>> System is messed up or too
>> many windows. Yep, good business practice, with good programming
>> practice.
>
> Standard business practice? "Call tech
>support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
>provide tech support", etc.
After 30 free games, you pay. Sanny also I think is trying to get
advertisement.
How is that free?
>
>
>> You think chess is the only game in town with tactics?
>
> Who is this mysterious "you"?
>
>
>> Programming can
>> get highly tactical (although it's more like poker in it's tactics -
>> you play the person, and you have incomplete information)
>
> Poker has hidden cards, whereas in chess,
>everything is out in the open; this makes
>the two games quite different in nature.
What do you think incomplete information means?
>
>
>> Methinks you like being a sockpuppet.
>
> You probably went wrong at the very first word
>in that sentence. In chess, you went wrong
>when you sat down to play... .
I wasn't aware I was playing chess at the moment.
>
>
> -- help bot
|
| |
Date: 14 Jul 2008 01:05:56
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Get Club has a Guilt Trip !!
|
> Nope.
> Your GC program is a friend of mine, I don't want to be stealing
> points that aren't mine.
Long Live the Friendship with GetClub Chess.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 13 Jul 2008 11:14:23
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Get Club has a Guilt Trip !!
|
On 13 Lug, 08:53, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Heres is your game. You could have win the game as the knight was
> trapped by Rook & Pawn.
It's somehow escaped your attention that Black's 32 nd is a non-move.
before that bug, the game was level, Black having a slight edge.
>
> Well Played. Looks like you have a old computer thats why GetClub
> played badly.
It's a 3 year old PC
>
> Are you 2000+ Rated? If yes do you think Easy Level is also arround
> 2000+?
I'm around 2000. Rather than have me tell you, why don't you test your
program on dedicated sites, like everyone else does ?
>
> This game was a win for you.
Nope.
Your GC program is a friend of mine, I don't want to be stealing
points that aren't mine.
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 23:53:29
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Get Club has a Guilt Trip !!
|
Heres is your game. You could have win the game as the knight was
trapped by Rook & Pawn.
Well Played. Looks like you have a old computer thats why GetClub
played badly.
Are you 2000+ Rated? If yes do you think Easy Level is also arround
2000+?
Game Played between alessandro j. and easy at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alessandro j.: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22567&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(alessandro j.) -- (easy)
1. d2-d4{4} f7-f5{0}
2. c2-c4{6} Ng8-f6{0}
3. Nb1-c3{2} Nb8-c6{22}
4. Bc1-g5{12} e7-e6{248}
5. e2-e4{24} f5-e4{26}
6. Nc3-e4{6} Bf8-b4{34}
7. Ne4-c3{16} Bb4-c3{26}
8. b2-c3{4} h7-h6{30}
9. Bg5-h4{12} g7-g5{24}
10. Bh4-g3{16} Ke8-g8{106}
11. Bf1-d3{18} b7-b6{66}
12. Ng1-e2{14} Bc8-b7{40}
13. Ke1-g1{4} Rf8-f7{40}
14. f2-f4{18} Nf6-h5{46}
15. Qd1-d2{20} g5-f4{56}
16. Bg3-f4{20} Nh5-f4{38}
17. Ne2-f4{6} Qd8-g5{34}
18. Rf1-f2{42} Ra8-f8{28}
19. Ra1-f1{4} Nc6-a5{60}
20. Nf4-h3{64} Qg5-d2{50}
21. Rf2-d2{4} Rf7-f1{20}
22. Bd3-f1{4} Bb7-e4{264}
23. Nh3-f2{60} Be4-f5{26}
24. Nf2-d1{34} Na5-c6{56}
25. Nd1-e3{14} Bf5-h7{32}
26. a2-a4{70} Bh7-e4{142}
27. d4-d5{88} Nc6-e5{118}
28. a4-a5{92} Rf8-f3{20}
29. a5-b6{108} a7-b6{114}
30. Ne3-g4{32} Rf3-f1{24}
31. Kg1-f1{14} Ne5-g4{140}
32. Rd2-d4{42} Rd2-d4{0}
33. Rd4-e4{122} Ng4-h2{170}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
alessandro j.: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22567&game=Chess
This game was a win for you.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 15:06:31
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Get Club has a Guilt Trip !!
|
Just to add that regardless of dedicating my entire system to GC, it
still took ages to make a move, and I still had to relog about 5 times
before GC, in it's own way, resigned.
But I accept that I should probably reformat my HD.
Till then, take care :O)
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 15:02:28
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Get Club has a Guilt Trip !!
|
I turned up at Getclubv to continue my match with the program. I am
obviously strangely addicted to the venture, as there is no rational
expanation to my behaviour except perhaps that I'm not going through
easy times, and that beating anything at chess always feels good.
As Instructed I closed all applications, and barely left another
webpage open to look at while getclub was pondering away.
This third game, i played badly in the opening, and GC, to my
surprise, played reasonably well, coming out slightly better out of
the opening, but then missing a simple continuation that would have
given it an extra pawn.
Right when I'm getting my pieces organized to take the game to an
ending ( yes helpbot, I couldn't beat GC again in the Opening, or the
Middlegame, but then, it IS rated about 200 points higher than
me ... ), GC plays the incredible Rf3 !?. Now that is amazing, as it's
the first time I've seen ANY program making a tricky move ! It doesn't
win, it doesn't lose, it mixes it up, wow, that's how a HUMAN plays.
Usually I've seen " ! " and " ?? " from handicapped level programs,
but never a " !? ".
Anyway, I don't fall for it and GC comes out B + N v. R, it's looking
unclear but programs are famous for sucking at endgames so I'm still
pretty hopeful, but, obviously satisfied by the previous semi-
brillancy, GC just GAVE ME ANOTHER MOVE, in practice losing a piece
and giving me back my win from the previous game that had misteriously
" disappeared ".
I was deeply touched. You can say a lot of things about GC, but not
that It hasn't got a soul, and that it can't mend the error of it's
ways. So I took the piece, but then I RESIGNED, as such gallant
behaviour deserves recognition.
I can proudly say a friendship is born today.
Also, for all you unbelievers out there, my + 1 - 1 score against Easy
means the program AVERAGES AT ABOUT 2000 FIDE, which is, if I'm not
mistaken, 2100 of YOUR RATING, hence Sanny's estimates are ENTIRELY
CORRECT, so there.
Of course, the best way to improve is to play someone slightly better
than yourself, so seeing that me and GC are at about the same level, I
won't be playing with again.
|
| |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 11:10:28
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
> So, now we're down to blaming the user. System is messed up or too
> many windows. Yep, good business practice, with good programming
> practice.
Daily 10-20 games are played at GetClub and no one is facing any
problem. Only he is facing the problem. So I conclude either he uses
too many browsers at a time or He uses multiple programs at a time.
Thats the reasion I ask him to not open many files.
Same problem once happened to me then I found the Anti virus program
was creating these problems.
Remove all unnecesary files and then play. I am sure you will be able
to complete your game.
I saw you finished one game easrlier then what happened now?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 23:57:31
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Sat, 12 Jul 2008 11:10:28 -0700 (PDT), Sanny
<[email protected] > wrote:
>
>> So, now we're down to blaming the user. System is messed up or too
>> many windows. Yep, good business practice, with good programming
>> practice.
>
>Daily 10-20 games are played at GetClub and no one is facing any
>problem. Only he is facing the problem. So I conclude either he uses
>too many browsers at a time or He uses multiple programs at a time.
What if, say multiple people are playing at once? 10-20 games isn't
that much of a test set.
>
>Thats the reasion I ask him to not open many files.
>
>Same problem once happened to me then I found the Anti virus program
>was creating these problems.
Begs the question, is it your program that is creating too many files?
>
>Remove all unnecesary files and then play. I am sure you will be able
>to complete your game.
>
>I saw you finished one game easrlier then what happened now?
Maybe I'm concerned I might have to delete files to play.... Or get a
faster machine.
Or maybe I answered that question before.
>
>Bye
>Sanny
>
>Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 22:12:22
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
> Easy is taking 5 minutes a move in the first few moves of another
> Dutch Defence. I now know how Morphy felt during those long lost days
> of Clockless Tournaments. I'm sure that much of its 2200 rating is due
> to boring it's opponent to tears. Still, all's fair in love and war, a
> program's gotta do what a program's gotta do and all that.
>
> At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
In games played by other players Easy Level plays a move in average 65
sec / move. For only a few moves it can take more than 2 min.
Your system freeze because you have opened too many program at one
time.
When Playing with GetClub do not open too many browsers/ sites.
Chess is a number crunching game So you need to give it decent CPU
time. Reload the program once you get error. Next time you will start
with same position where you left.
Rewmember do not open many Browsers while playing.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 18:24:23
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 11, 6:32 pm, "Alessandro J." <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Bring my win back, Or I'll never play the thing again !
Even Sanny cannot raise the dead; what
you're asking for is a miracle.
> Infact, that was an empty threat, and as soon as I posted this I was
> back on Getclub.com to continue my match with your program, regardless
> of the fact that it's subject to mood swings and can decide it hasn't
> lost a game, just because it can.
>
> Easy is taking 5 minutes a move in the first few moves of another
> Dutch Defence.
If it's lightning rote moves you want, just
download one of the ubiquitous chess
programs which of course only think "inside
the box".
> I now know how Morphy felt during those long lost days
> of Clockless Tournaments.
He probably felt insecure, because he was
short, very young, and visibly cringed when
he saw moves like p-h3 routinely played in
the opening.
> I'm sure that much of its 2200 rating is due
> to boring it's opponent to tears. Still, all's fair in love and war, a
> program's gotta do what a program's gotta do and all that.
>
> At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
The bug which prevented GC from loading
its Java applet has been corrected. Maybe
your system is just messed up?
> I must be getting twice stupid every time by carrying on playing
> against this thing, can't explain any other way why I bothered to
> return.
Try this experiment: read some of Dr.
IMnes' postings to rgc; if they now seem
to make sense to you, you have indeed
been dumbed-down just as you suspect.
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 10:47:24
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Fri, 11 Jul 2008 18:24:23 -0700 (PDT), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Jul 11, 6:32 pm, "Alessandro J." <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Bring my win back, Or I'll never play the thing again !
>
> Even Sanny cannot raise the dead; what
>you're asking for is a miracle.
>
>
>> Infact, that was an empty threat, and as soon as I posted this I was
>> back on Getclub.com to continue my match with your program, regardless
>> of the fact that it's subject to mood swings and can decide it hasn't
>> lost a game, just because it can.
>>
>> Easy is taking 5 minutes a move in the first few moves of another
>> Dutch Defence.
>
> If it's lightning rote moves you want, just
>download one of the ubiquitous chess
>programs which of course only think "inside
>the box".
>
>
>> I now know how Morphy felt during those long lost days
>> of Clockless Tournaments.
>
> He probably felt insecure, because he was
>short, very young, and visibly cringed when
>he saw moves like p-h3 routinely played in
>the opening.
>
>
> > I'm sure that much of its 2200 rating is due
>> to boring it's opponent to tears. Still, all's fair in love and war, a
>> program's gotta do what a program's gotta do and all that.
>>
>> At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
>
> The bug which prevented GC from loading
>its Java applet has been corrected. Maybe
>your system is just messed up?
>
>
>> I must be getting twice stupid every time by carrying on playing
>> against this thing, can't explain any other way why I bothered to
>> return.
>
> Try this experiment: read some of Dr.
>IMnes' postings to rgc; if they now seem
>to make sense to you, you have indeed
>been dumbed-down just as you suspect.
>
So, now we're down to blaming the user. System is messed up or too
many windows. Yep, good business practice, with good programming
practice.
You think chess is the only game in town with tactics? Programming can
get highly tactical (although it's more like poker in it's tactics -
you play the person, and you have incomplete information)
Methinks you like being a sockpuppet.
>
> -- help bot
>
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 15:32:36
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On 12 Lug, 00:11, "Alessandro J." <[email protected] > wrote:
> Bring my win back, Or I'll never play the thing again !
Infact, that was an empty threat, and as soon as I posted this I was
back on Getclub.com to continue my match with your program, regardless
of the fact that it's subject to mood swings and can decide it hasn't
lost a game, just because it can.
Easy is taking 5 minutes a move in the first few moves of another
Dutch Defence. I now know how Morphy felt during those long lost days
of Clockless Tournaments. I'm sure that much of its 2200 rating is due
to boring it's opponent to tears. Still, all's fair in love and war, a
program's gotta do what a program's gotta do and all that.
At move 6, I think it was, my Firefox freezed again.
I must be getting twice stupid every time by carrying on playing
against this thing, can't explain any other way why I bothered to
return.
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 15:11:36
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On 11 Lug, 19:32, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> On Jul 11, 9:50=A0pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > And with play like this you say that Easy level is 2300+ rating?
> > Peter chopped Easy like hamburger, =A0sliced it like tomatoes, =A0diced=
it
> > like onions, and toasted it like buns.
>
> He used Computers help, to play against it. I only think about Human
> Players.
>
> Bye
> Sanny
>
> Play Chess at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
Sanny,
Against all common sense I logged in again.
Much to my dismay, I discovered that my winning position against Easy
has simply vanished and this has made me furious.
Whatever Internet social experiment you are conducting with your team,
It's working, congrats.
Bring my win back, Or I'll never play the thing again !
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 10:32:02
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 11, 9:50=A0pm, "[email protected]" <[email protected] > wrote:
> And with play like this you say that Easy level is 2300+ rating?
> Peter chopped Easy like hamburger, =A0sliced it like tomatoes, =A0diced i=
t
> like onions, and toasted it like buns.
He used Computers help, to play against it. I only think about Human
Players.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 10:30:49
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 11, 9:59=A0pm, Peter Osterlund <[email protected] > wrote:
> Sanny <[email protected]> writes:
> >> > May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
>
> >> Yes, I used glaurung, set to 1 second per move and no thinking on the
> >> opponent's time.
>
> > If you set 1 second / move then why you made a few moves in 166
> > seconds and 112 seconds.
>
> > I find 10. e2-e3{112} =A0you took 112 seconds
>
> > and 12. Ke1-f1{166} you took 166 seconds.
>
> > Was it really thinking for 1 sec / move?
>
> Yes it was 1 second / move (or actually the time control was set to 60
> moves in 60 seconds), but becausegetclubtook on the average 42
> seconds per move, I did other things whilegetclubwas thinking.
> Sometimes it took a while before I went back to the game.
>
> Here is some data from from the glaurung log file that shows thinking
> time, search depth, score, and the first three moves of the principal
> variation, for all positions where glaurung was thinking, ie not when
> it was still in the opening book. The thinking time is measured in
> milliseconds.
>
> =A07 depth 13 score cp =A0 82 time 2532 pv g1f3 e7e6 c1d2
> =A08 depth 13 score cp =A0 82 time 1604 pv c1d2 b8d7 e2e4
> =A09 depth 13 score cp =A0119 time 2306 pv a2a4 b4b7 e2e4
> 10 depth 14 score cp =A0 76 time 3841 pv e2e3 a6f1 h1f1
> 11 depth 14 score cp =A0 68 time 2847 pv f3d2 a6f1 d2f1
> 12 depth 15 score cp =A0 58 time 3266 pv e1f1 g7g6 d1b3
> 13 depth 14 score cp =A0107 time 1611 pv c3b5 b8a6 d2c4
> 14 depth 14 score cp =A0 96 time =A0452 pv d2c4 b2f6 c4b6
> 15 depth 14 score cp =A0100 time 1168 pv c4b6 a8b8 a4a5
> 16 depth 14 score cp =A0227 time 1487 pv a4a5 b8b7 d1a4
> 17 depth 13 score cp =A0329 time =A0699 pv a1a4 a6b4 b5d4
> 18 depth 13 score cp =A0456 time 1107 pv f1g1 e7e6 a5a6
> 19 depth 14 score cp 1284 time 1081 pv a5a6 b7b6 a6a7
> 20 depth 14 score cp 1313 time =A0736 pv a6a7 f7f5 a7a8q
> 21 depth 14 score cp 1354 time =A0712 pv a7a8q e8f7 b5c7
> 22 depth 14 score cp 1329 time =A0638 pv b5c7 g7g6 a8a7
> 23 depth 12 score mate 12 time =A0904 pv a8e8 f7g8 a4a8
> 24 depth =A09 score mate 11 time =A0 19 pv a4a8 b6b8 a8b8
> 25 depth =A06 score mate =A05 time =A0 =A06 pv d1b1 b4c2 b1c2
>
> I think it's quite impressive that it found a mate-in-12 in 0.904
> seconds.
>
> --
> Peter Osterlund - [email protected]://web.telia.com/~u89404340
Do you have dual/ quad processor? And what is the configuration of
your System?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 20:16:51
From: Peter Osterlund
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Sanny <[email protected] > writes:
> On Jul 11, 9:59 pm, Peter Osterlund <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Sanny <[email protected]> writes:
>> >> > May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
>>
>> >> Yes, I used glaurung, set to 1 second per move and no thinking on the
>> >> opponent's time.
>>
>> > If you set 1 second / move then why you made a few moves in 166
>> > seconds and 112 seconds.
>>
>> > I find 10. e2-e3{112} you took 112 seconds
>>
>> > and 12. Ke1-f1{166} you took 166 seconds.
>>
>> > Was it really thinking for 1 sec / move?
>>
>> Yes it was 1 second / move (or actually the time control was set to 60
>> moves in 60 seconds), but becausegetclubtook on the average 42
>> seconds per move, I did other things whilegetclubwas thinking.
>> Sometimes it took a while before I went back to the game.
>>
>> Here is some data from from the glaurung log file that shows thinking
>> time, search depth, score, and the first three moves of the principal
>> variation, for all positions where glaurung was thinking, ie not when
>> it was still in the opening book. The thinking time is measured in
>> milliseconds.
>>
>> 7 depth 13 score cp 82 time 2532 pv g1f3 e7e6 c1d2
...
>> 23 depth 12 score mate 12 time 904 pv a8e8 f7g8 a4a8
>> 24 depth 9 score mate 11 time 19 pv a4a8 b6b8 a8b8
>> 25 depth 6 score mate 5 time 6 pv d1b1 b4c2 b1c2
>>
>> I think it's quite impressive that it found a mate-in-12 in 0.904
>> seconds.
>
> Do you have dual/ quad processor? And what is the configuration of
> your System?
Glaurung was running on a 2.6GHz Core 2 duo and GetClub was running on
a 3.1GHz P4. Glaurung was using both cores, although I don't know how
effective that is when it's only allowed to think for 1 second on
average.
--
Peter Osterlund - [email protected]
http://web.telia.com/~u89404340
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 09:50:12
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
And with play like this you say that Easy level is 2300+ rating?
Peter chopped Easy like hamburger, sliced it like tomatoes, diced it
like onions, and toasted it like buns.
> =A0peter: (White)
> easy: (Black)
> Game Played at:http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
> View Recorded Game:http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=3DDM22432&game=
=3DChess
|
| | |
Date: 18 Jul 2008 05:55:57
From: Alessandro J.
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On 18 Lug, 03:03, help bot <[email protected] > wrote:
> =A0 If you had paid attention, you would know
> that this problem afflicted several users, but
> after being corrected, one and only one
> continued to report problems.
That user continued to have problems, and has since come to the
conclusion that its' system has some problem with java.
> =A0 Thus far, only Mr. Allesandro has admitted
> to having any significant difficulties with the
> program, and I find it odd that he also
> claims (at the same time) to be rated 2000
> FIDE. =A0Compare and contrast to those who
> are using other chess engines to win, but
> who play under pseudonyms to protect
> their identity (in case of an embarrassing
> loss).
OK, I'll level with you.
My peak was 1980, at the moment I'm stuck on the lowly 1962. I'm
hoping that by the end of the summer I will have at least once
improved, if not twice, and finally bridged the gap to 2000, and get
the Italian equivalent of the expert title. I should work on my
openings to get there, but I can't be asked ...
First : It could be argued that this particular rating was obtained
under tournament conditions , and not by flicking pieces about on a
screen in between reading the sports pages and messing around with my
mp3 library. My playchess blitz rating is " only " 1700 - 1800,
suggesting that a lot more than playing ability goes into one's final
rating.
Second : some of my problems must surely be derived from the fact
that against the Dutch my lifetime score is absolutely dreadful, I
think it's in the region of 1/2 out of 4, I really can't come to terms
with that wretched opening, and by chance is GC's defence of choice to
1. d4
Third : a bug in GC resulted it in screwing up the game in a level
position in our third game ( the first two I won quite easily ), I am
fairly confident I would have had the better of the program in the
endgame, though that might well be empty boasting.
Fourth : It is recognized that FIDE ratings, especially those under
2000, are considerably inflated compared to national gradings, and
infact some organizers have revised the old FIDE =3D USCF - 100 to FIDE
=3D USCF.
All of this to say that compared to other software GC has a lot to
work on, but I'm sure it can give anyone to class " C " a fair game,
infact, some of the moves it makes are downright interesting for a
software to make as, while not blatant blunders, still give a very
reasonable impression of an improver, something the commercial
software out there are still trying to emulate, albeit unsuccesfully.
|
| | |
Date: 17 Jul 2008 18:19:05
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 17, 1:19 am, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> To Correct that now you can play 120 Games for free. After playing 120
> games I want that atleast now he should pay for the benefits he gets.
I've played a lot more than that, and I'm still
struggling to find these alleged benefits. ; >D
> There are many costs Development/ Mantance/ Legal
Legal costs, eh? Has anyone yet sued
for breach of promise (the illusory 2300
strength, the innumerable "improvements"
and so forth)?
> and many other to
> make the GetClub Program up Running. So I want good players to pay
> $5.00 for 3 months Subsctiption. Is this rate high?
Here in the USA, $5 is what it costs to
drive an SUV to the gas station to put in
a bit more, while cussing and blaming oil
speculators for the "high" cost of filling
one's Chevy Blazer or Ford Expedition
(buying which, however, seemed like a
good idea at the time). It's what used to
be called "chump-change".
A better approach might be to have free
access to the site and chess engine, but
have strategically-placed ads which draw
revenue indirectly. As a fellow called
"Mig" used to write, "my job is to drive
traffic to the site" (which in turn is
presumed to generate revenues from the
ads). But then, all this has been
suggested several times before... .
-- help bot
|
| | |
Date: 17 Jul 2008 18:03:01
From: help bot
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Jul 16, 9:22 pm, Patrick Volk <[email protected] > wrote:
> > Sanny asserted that the user's problem
> >was caused by him having too many
> >browsers open at the same time-- a mere
> >guess, IMO.
> Based on what? That nobody else had a problem?
If you had paid attention, you would know
that this problem afflicted several users, but
after being corrected, one and only one
continued to report problems.
> > Standard business practice? "Call tech
> >support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
> >provide tech support", etc.
> After 30 free games, you pay. Sanny also I think is trying to get
> advertisement.
>
> How is that free?
It's free in that every player over say, 1200
USCF can easily earn more free games just
by winning against the GC program. Anybody
weaker can just stop playing after they use up
their free allotment. From what we've seen
here, everyone is rated 2000+ and is bragging
about how easily they defeat every level they
play -- in spite of considerable improvement
over time.
> What do you think incomplete information means?
It seems to be a reference to posters like
you, who make preposterous assertions
which ignore obvious facts known to those
who read what is actually going on here. : >D
Thus far, only Mr. Allesandro has admitted
to having any significant difficulties with the
program, and I find it odd that he also
claims (at the same time) to be rated 2000
FIDE. Compare and contrast to those who
are using other chess engines to win, but
who play under pseudonyms to protect
their identity (in case of an embarrassing
loss).
As for exploiting the ignorant to make gobs
of money, I don't see the relevance until the
sinister plan succeeds (which it hasn't and
probably never will).
Now, one person mentioned the possibility
that Sanny's own Web site may be opening
what he called "too many" browsers, and
indeed, it is a fact that in my games, many
such extra tabs or browsers can appear,
seemingly at random. On a system with
severely restricted resources, this could
lead to trouble. Another problem that has
been mentioned is a "disappearing" chess
board, and I am wondering if the user was
simply not savvy enough to scroll down
after Sanny's bizarre site moved the chess
board up-screen during play. These are
very real problems, but they are not quite
the crippling issues they are made out to
be by some posters here.
-- help bot
|
| | | |
Date: 18 Jul 2008 00:01:48
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:03:01 -0700 (PDT), help bot
<[email protected] > wrote:
>On Jul 16, 9:22 pm, Patrick Volk <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> > Sanny asserted that the user's problem
>> >was caused by him having too many
>> >browsers open at the same time-- a mere
>> >guess, IMO.
>
>> Based on what? That nobody else had a problem?
>
> If you had paid attention, you would know
>that this problem afflicted several users, but
>after being corrected, one and only one
>continued to report problems.
If you had paid attention, you're saying that he had too many windows
open every time he tried accessing the site. Hence my skepticism. No
probing into what he was doing either... Just a snap decision like
some level 0 techie reading from a script.
>
>
>> > Standard business practice? "Call tech
>> >support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
>> >provide tech support", etc.
>
>> After 30 free games, you pay. Sanny also I think is trying to get
>> advertisement.
>>
>> How is that free?
>
> It's free in that every player over say, 1200
>USCF can easily earn more free games just
>by winning against the GC program. Anybody
>weaker can just stop playing after they use up
>their free allotment. From what we've seen
>here, everyone is rated 2000+ and is bragging
>about how easily they defeat every level they
>play -- in spite of considerable improvement
>over time.
So I'm supposed to believe you as opposed to Sanny. Wow... you're a
funny sockpuppet.
>
>
>> What do you think incomplete information means?
>
> It seems to be a reference to posters like
>you, who make preposterous assertions
>which ignore obvious facts known to those
>who read what is actually going on here. :>D
I've been reading. I know what's been going on. I've seen Sanny's
statements of the program being much improved (tm), and even caught a
few of his rants on how complicated the program is getting.
>
> Thus far, only Mr. Allesandro has admitted
>to having any significant difficulties with the
>program, and I find it odd that he also
>claims (at the same time) to be rated 2000
>FIDE. Compare and contrast to those who
>are using other chess engines to win, but
>who play under pseudonyms to protect
>their identity (in case of an embarrassing
>loss).
Do I care? I'm lucky if I would keep a 1200 chess rating, but I'm not
discussing the chess concepts of his program. I'm trying to discuss
the programming concepts of his program, from a game theory
standpoint.
>
> As for exploiting the ignorant to make gobs
>of money, I don't see the relevance until the
>sinister plan succeeds (which it hasn't and
>probably never will).
Again, you're dissing the user base. Very bad for business.
>
> Now, one person mentioned the possibility
>that Sanny's own Web site may be opening
>what he called "too many" browsers, and
>indeed, it is a fact that in my games, many
>such extra tabs or browsers can appear,
>seemingly at random. On a system with
>severely restricted resources, this could
>lead to trouble.
You know Occham's Razor? The simplest explaination is often true.
If Sanny's website is opening "too many" browsers, why is that the
person's problem?
Love the 'seemingly at random'. Can't say you don't know.
And please tell me that the person on successive days had many
browsers open.
> Another problem that has
>been mentioned is a "disappearing" chess
>board, and I am wondering if the user was
>simply not savvy enough to scroll down
>after Sanny's bizarre site moved the chess
>board up-screen during play.
Would that be because the screen is expecting a particular size, and
do you think that's the user's fault?
I've been trying to look at this from the standpoint that Sanny wants
to bring this to the masses. If he makes the people in r.g.c. happy,
he might get a favorable reference from someone, makes one of the
chess websites, and he could be off and running.
> These are
>very real problems, but they are not quite
>the crippling issues they are made out to
>be by some posters here.
I know that, but I've been trying to address the crippling ones.
Adding an ask.com-type thing, where apparently he's keep a table of
questions, and in order to make them obvious listing them is an
example of a crippling one.
Those type of things turn potential sites into victims of their own
success.
Consider the humble Swiss Army knife. Imagine if it had 300
different tools. The maker would be proud, people might be amused, but
I doubt they'd buy it.
Probably the main thing is, software pathology draws me in. This is
a classic case. As much as everybody talks about tactics, the real
problem is strategy. The strategy he devised in making the program
that is. Tried to do it under the idea of 'programming in the small',
which is basically sacrificing structure for getting it done. You
write methods like you won't have to change them.
But not having a complete grasp of the problem, and trying to
determine how well the program plays against a non-representative set
of opponents (yutzes like myself, good players, and people running
programs) is making him wander in trying to get it to work correctly.
Every time he wanders, his code gets more complicated.
How soon before he says 'good enough'. How soon before other people
nod their head? Will he (or his team) code themselves in a corner
before the end comes?
That's what I'm curious about.
>
>
> -- help bot
>
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 16 Jul 2008 22:19:07
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
> > =A0Standard business practice? =A0"Call tech
> >support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
> >provide tech support", etc.
>
> =A0After 30 free games, you pay. Sanny also I think is trying to get
> advertisement.
To Correct that now you can play 120 Games for free. After playing 120
games I want that atleast now he should pay for the benefits he gets.
There are many costs Development/ Mantance/ Legal and many other to
make the GetClub Program up Running. So I want good players to pay
$5.00 for 3 months Subsctiption. Is this rate high?
$5.00 for 120 Chess games (3 months Subscription) is very decent I
suppose.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Jul 2008 23:21:36
From: Patrick Volk
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
On Wed, 16 Jul 2008 22:19:07 -0700 (PDT), Sanny
<[email protected] > wrote:
>> > �Standard business practice? �"Call tech
>> >support"/ "As the software is free, we don't
>> >provide tech support", etc.
>>
>> �After 30 free games, you pay. Sanny also I think is trying to get
>> advertisement.
>
>To Correct that now you can play 120 Games for free. After playing 120
>games I want that atleast now he should pay for the benefits he gets.
>
>There are many costs Development/ Mantance/ Legal and many other to
>make the GetClub Program up Running. So I want good players to pay
>$5.00 for 3 months Subsctiption. Is this rate high?
>
>$5.00 for 120 Chess games (3 months Subscription) is very decent I
>suppose.
>
>Bye
>Sanny
That is ok with me. Hosting a server costs money, so you can charge
for it. Whether people will pay for the privelege is another matter.
One suggestion (which would probably help you nicely) is allow people
online to play each other.
>
>Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
>
|
| | | |
Date: 17 Jul 2008 15:39:15
From: Tobias Heidelmann
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Sanny schrieb:
> To Correct that now you can play 120 Games for free. After playing 120
> games I want that atleast now he should pay for the benefits he gets.
>
> There are many costs Development/ Mantance/ Legal and many other to
> make the GetClub Program up Running. So I want good players to pay
> $5.00 for 3 months Subsctiption. Is this rate high?
>
yeah, it is high. Compared to other sites, it is very high.
dude, your program is amateure stuff. And not even good amateure stuff.
the webdesign is ugly, your program still has bugs.
Just compare it to fics. Take a look at interfaces like babaschess. This
is free and looks professional.
so, compared to the competition your rate is very high and it could be
considered an insult that you expect people to pay for this thing.
Tobias
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 09:30:57
From: Sanny
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
> > May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
>
> Yes, I used glaurung, set to 1 second per move and no thinking on the
> opponent's time.
If you set 1 second / move then why you made a few moves in 166
seconds and 112 seconds.
I find 10. e2-e3{112} you took 112 seconds
and 12. Ke1-f1{166} you took 166 seconds.
Was it really thinking for 1 sec / move?
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 18:59:25
From: Peter Osterlund
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Sanny <[email protected] > writes:
>> > May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
>>
>> Yes, I used glaurung, set to 1 second per move and no thinking on the
>> opponent's time.
>
> If you set 1 second / move then why you made a few moves in 166
> seconds and 112 seconds.
>
> I find 10. e2-e3{112} you took 112 seconds
>
> and 12. Ke1-f1{166} you took 166 seconds.
>
> Was it really thinking for 1 sec / move?
Yes it was 1 second / move (or actually the time control was set to 60
moves in 60 seconds), but because getclub took on the average 42
seconds per move, I did other things while getclub was thinking.
Sometimes it took a while before I went back to the game.
Here is some data from from the glaurung log file that shows thinking
time, search depth, score, and the first three moves of the principal
variation, for all positions where glaurung was thinking, ie not when
it was still in the opening book. The thinking time is measured in
milliseconds.
7 depth 13 score cp 82 time 2532 pv g1f3 e7e6 c1d2
8 depth 13 score cp 82 time 1604 pv c1d2 b8d7 e2e4
9 depth 13 score cp 119 time 2306 pv a2a4 b4b7 e2e4
10 depth 14 score cp 76 time 3841 pv e2e3 a6f1 h1f1
11 depth 14 score cp 68 time 2847 pv f3d2 a6f1 d2f1
12 depth 15 score cp 58 time 3266 pv e1f1 g7g6 d1b3
13 depth 14 score cp 107 time 1611 pv c3b5 b8a6 d2c4
14 depth 14 score cp 96 time 452 pv d2c4 b2f6 c4b6
15 depth 14 score cp 100 time 1168 pv c4b6 a8b8 a4a5
16 depth 14 score cp 227 time 1487 pv a4a5 b8b7 d1a4
17 depth 13 score cp 329 time 699 pv a1a4 a6b4 b5d4
18 depth 13 score cp 456 time 1107 pv f1g1 e7e6 a5a6
19 depth 14 score cp 1284 time 1081 pv a5a6 b7b6 a6a7
20 depth 14 score cp 1313 time 736 pv a6a7 f7f5 a7a8q
21 depth 14 score cp 1354 time 712 pv a7a8q e8f7 b5c7
22 depth 14 score cp 1329 time 638 pv b5c7 g7g6 a8a7
23 depth 12 score mate 12 time 904 pv a8e8 f7g8 a4a8
24 depth 9 score mate 11 time 19 pv a4a8 b6b8 a8b8
25 depth 6 score mate 5 time 6 pv d1b1 b4c2 b1c2
I think it's quite impressive that it found a mate-in-12 in 0.904
seconds.
--
Peter Osterlund - [email protected]
http://web.telia.com/~u89404340
|
| |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 08:06:18
From: Sanny
Subject: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Peter plays very quick. At 20sec/ move he won the Easy Level in just
25 moves. Look how quickly he won the Easy Level.
May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
Game Played between peter and easy at GetClub.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
peter: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22432&game=Chess
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
White -- Black
(peter) -- (easy)
1. d2-d4{8} Ng8-f6{0}
2. c2-c4{4} c7-c5{0}
3. d4-d5{6} b7-b5{0}
4. c4-b5{6} a7-a6{0}
5. b5-a6{8} Bc8-a6{48}
6. Nb1-c3{12} Qd8-a5{40}
7. Ng1-f3{22} d7-d6{42}
8. Bc1-d2{58} Qa5-b4{22}
9. a2-a4{62} Nf6-e4{50}
10. e2-e3{112} Ne4-d2{78}
11. Nf3-d2{38} Ba6-f1{22}
12. Ke1-f1{166} Qb4-b2{22}
13. Nc3-b5{10} Nb8-a6{36}
14. Nd2-c4{20} Qb2-f6{76}
15. Nc4-b6{24} Ra8-b8{40}
16. a4-a5{8} Qf6-h4{98}
17. Ra1-a4{74} Na6-b4{82}
18. Kf1-g1{16} Rb8-b7{62}
19. a5-a6{16} Rb7-b6{46}
20. a6-a7{20} f7-f6{40}
21. Qa7-a8{Q}{10} Ke8-f7{76}
22. Nb5-c7{6} h7-h6{88}
23. Qa8-e8{24} Kf7-g8{2}
24. Ra4-a8{12} Kg8-h7{48}
25. Qd1-b1{10} g7-g6{4}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
peter: (White)
easy: (Black)
Game Played at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
View Recorded Game: http://www.getclub.com/playgame.php?id=DM22432&game=Chess
Was there any way to stop Peter's Queening?
He threw his both knights and attacked in such a way that he was able
to get the Queen.
Bye
Sanny
Play Chess at: http://www.GetClub.com/Chess.html
|
| | |
Date: 12 Jul 2008 10:36:35
From: Peter Osterlund
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Sanny <[email protected] > writes:
> Peter plays very quick. At 20sec/ move he won the Easy Level in just
> 25 moves. Look how quickly he won the Easy Level.
>
> May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
I played another game between glaurung and getclub. Glaurung was using
1 second / move and getclub was at master level, which used about 30
minutes / move on average. Here is the game:
[Date "2008.07.11"]
[White "GetClub master level (30min/move)"]
[Black "Glaurung 2.1 (1sec/move, no pondering)"]
[Result "0-1"]
1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. Bc4 Qc7 6. Qxd4 Nb6 7. Bb5 Nc6
8. Bxc6 bxc6 9. Nf3 Ba6 10. Na3 e6 11. Nc2 c5 12. Qh4 Bd3 13. Ne3 Be7 14.
Qg4 O-O 15. Bd2 Qb7 16. h3 d5 17. exd6 Bxd6 18. O-O-O Rab8 19. b3 f5 20.
Qh5 Qa6 21. Kb2 f4 22. Nc2 Nc4+ 23. Kb1 Rxb3+
{White resigns} 0-1
Data extracted from the glaurung log file:
5 depth 14 score cp 45 time 2298 pv d8c7 d1e2 d5b6
6 depth 15 score cp 60 time 1752 pv d5b6 c4b5 b8c6
7 depth 15 score cp 52 time 1914 pv b8c6 b5c6 b7c6
8 depth 14 score cp 54 time 1089 pv b7c6 c1e3 a8b8
9 depth 13 score cp 54 time 1238 pv c8a6 b2b3 c6c5
10 depth 14 score cp 137 time 2102 pv e7e6 b2b3 a8b8
11 depth 13 score cp 143 time 1039 pv c6c5 d4e4 a8b8
12 depth 13 score cp 213 time 1016 pv a6d3 c2a3 c7b7
13 depth 13 score cp 188 time 678 pv f8e7 h4g3 e8g8
14 depth 12 score cp 266 time 1499 pv e8g8 c1d2 c7b7
15 depth 12 score cp 241 time 1537 pv c7b7 h2h4 f7f5
16 depth 12 score cp 278 time 926 pv d7d5 h3h4 b7a6
17 depth 13 score cp 347 time 1424 pv e7d6 f3g5 a8d8
18 depth 13 score cp 403 time 1025 pv a8b8 f3e1 b6d7
19 depth 13 score cp 441 time 1343 pv f7f5 g4g5 b7a6
20 depth 13 score cp 666 time 913 pv b7a6 c1b2 f5f4
21 depth 13 score cp 694 time 832 pv f5f4 h5g4 f4e3
22 depth 9 score cp 1564 time 620 pv b6c4 b2a1 d3c2
23 depth 7 score mate 7 time 88 pv b8b3 a2b3 a6a3
The average thinking time of glaurung was 1.01 seconds if you also
take the four book moves into account:
octave:1 > mean([0 0 0 0 2298 1752 1914 1089 1238 2102 1039 1016 678 1499 1537 926 1424 1025 1343 913 832 620 88])/1000
ans = 1.0145
--
Peter Osterlund - [email protected]
http://web.telia.com/~u89404340
|
| | |
Date: 11 Jul 2008 17:57:54
From: Peter Osterlund
Subject: Re: Extra Ordinary game by Peter.
|
Sanny <[email protected] > writes:
> Peter plays very quick. At 20sec/ move he won the Easy Level in just
> 25 moves. Look how quickly he won the Easy Level.
>
> May be he uses a computer. But still his games are very impressive.
Yes, I used glaurung, set to 1 second per move and no thinking on the
opponent's time.
--
Peter Osterlund - [email protected]
http://web.telia.com/~u89404340
|
| |
Date: 09 Jul 2008 11:51:18
From:
Subject: Re: Tough Game against Rybka.
|
On Jul 8, 11:45=A0pm, Sanny <[email protected] > wrote:
> Today again game was improved, So GetClub will play twice Stronger.
I am now certain that this whole GetClub thing is all a hoax.
First of all, nobody could have been involved in computer chess for so
long and learned so little about it as to make such amazingly silly
statements as "You can see how good GetClub played despite such
horrible positions" and "I find most of the moves made by GetClub were
forced move", let alone the innumerable "GetClub will play twice
Stronger" posts.
Secondly, I have some serious doubts that it was Rybka that played
White in this game. Moves 40 and 41, in particular, are definitely sub-
optimal. 40.Rdc1 is the 5th best move (two other moves are easily
found to lead to relatively short mates), and 41.Rxc7 is far worse
than 41.d6 (which also leads to a mate). However, I don't have Rybka,
so I'm just making judgments based on how strong I know Rybka is, and
the moves that White made in this game.
Either way, this is my last post to any thread about GetClub.
Best of Luck, Suckers!
jm (ex-Sucker)
|
|
