Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Hiarcs Propaganda?
1 2 Previous Next  
- - By billyraybar (***) Date 2007-05-18 08:03 Edited 2007-05-18 08:07
Hiarcs is advertised as  the most 'humanlike' chess engine and I always thought that was pure propaganda so I put it to the test.  Rybka as white with opening book vs Hiarcs without opening book.

This position is after 17...Be7

r1b1qknr/pp1nbppp/2p5/4P3/4PB2/1P3N2/N1Q1BP1P/2KR2R1 w - - 0 18


I didn't expect Hiarcs to win with no opening book but I certainly didnt expect it to play this weird either.  I personally think Hiarcs plays no more 'humanlike' than Rybka.  Just curious if anyone thinks Hiarcs really does play more humanlike that other chess engines. The ugly Pgn is below.    

[Event "Rated game, 60m + 15s"]
[Site "Engine Room"]
[Date "2007.05.16"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Psiloritis, Rybka 2.3.1 mp"]
[Black "Billyraybar, HIARCS 11.1 MP UCI ."]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D21"]
[WhiteElo "2593"]
[Annotator "0.41;0.25"]
[PlyCount "59"]
[EventDate "2007.05.16"]
[TimeControl "3600+15"]

{Rybka 2.3.1 mp: 18.9 ply; 195kN/s Dual Core AMD Opteron(tm) Processor 180, (2
threads), `O\} 1. d4 {B/0 0} d5 {0.25/17 142} 2. c4 {B/0 0} dxc4 {0.13/15 97}
3. Nf3 {B/0 0} e6 {0.14/14 27} 4. e3 {B/0 0} Qd5 {0.52/15 122} 5. Bd2 {
0.41/18 393} Nd7 {0.66/18 0} 6. b3 {0.51/18 177} cxb3 {(Ngf6) 0.17/17 90} 7.
Nc3 {0.48/19 88} Qf5 {(Qh5) 0.00/17 0} 8. e4 {0.60/18 100} Qg6 {0.02/17 142} 9.
axb3 {0.67/19 132} c6 {0.02/16 0} 10. Bd3 {0.68/18 171} e5 {(Bd6) 0.00/16 137}
11. dxe5 {0.72/17 78} Qxg2 {(Be7) -0.05/16 0} 12. Rg1 {0.86/15 34} Qh3 {
0.17/15 0} 13. Be2 {0.91/16 87} Qe6 {-0.17/15 134} 14. Bf4 {0.67/17 59} Bb4 {
(Nc5) -0.21/15 291} 15. Qc2 {0.65/17 63} Kf8 {(Nc5) -0.22/15 128} 16. O-O-O {
1.10/15 72} Qe8 {0.32/16 273} 17. Na2 {1.00/16 51} Be7 {(Ba3+) 0.38/15 139} 18.
Kb1 {1.15/16 87} g6 {(f6) 0.49/16 332} 19. Be3 {1.15/16 255} a5 {0.68/15 0} 20.
h4 {1.21/16 68} Kg7 {(h5) 1.10/15 240} 21. h5 {1.49/15 75} a4 {1.10/14 0} 22.
bxa4 {1.47/14 16} Kf8 {(Bd8) 1.53/13 103} 23. Nc1 {2.10/14 63} Nb8 {
(Kg7) 1.96/15 201} 24. Nd3 {2.40/15 68} Na6 {2.10/15 0} 25. Nf4 {2.89/17 302}
Nc7 {3.53/14 218} 26. Bc4 {3.29/18 130} c5 {3.69/14 216} 27. Bxf7 {3.35/19 106}
Kxf7 {(Qxa4) 4.54/15 386} 28. hxg6+ {2.66/13 17} hxg6 {4.30/14 5} 29. e6+ {
3.68/14 28} Nxe6 {4.64/15 62} 30. Ne5+ {
Billyraybar,HIARCS 11.1 MP UCI t resigns 3.90/16 17} 1-0
Parent - - By nuff (**) Date 2007-05-18 09:52
If you thought that was propaganda look at the posts of the Hiarcs tester in CCC. He seems to be unaware that ChessMaster is a mass market program aimed at a new players not engine freaks. If ChessMaster have any news to pass on to their customers why wouldn't they use the ChessMaster forum rather than a "leak" through a Hiarcs tester? Diabolical?

If I were to scrutinize Hiarcs properly I would ask why

- their website is not up to date with modern standards
-  the obsession with dwelling in the past and reviving old versions
-  issues raised with their activation issue
- they should have their own support forum rather than leech others
Parent - By Michael Waesch Date 2007-05-18 09:55
Fully agreed.

Mike
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 09:44
If you thought that was propaganda look at the posts of the Hiarcs tester in CCC. He seems to be unaware that ChessMaster is a mass market program aimed at a new players not engine freaks. If ChessMaster have any news to pass on to their customers why wouldn't they use the ChessMaster forum rather than a "leak" through a Hiarcs tester? Diabolical?

As I am sure you know the king and chessmaster are not the same thing. The author of the king is a friend of mine and enters his engine in tournaments like leiden where i have just returned from. I asked a queston which he answered - the king is now mp and there will be a new CM soon(containing the king).

If I were to scrutinize Hiarcs properly

Please report back when you have scrutinised it properly.
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 10:46
Harvey,
I think it's pretty clear that a number of people have issues with the Hiarcs er...spin...if I can call it that.

You could group all these issues together and answer them. That way it stops it from becomming a personal "I hate you" sort of war.
It's rather like the way Apple go about advertising...some people love them, many hate them. Their style of presenting themselves is risky and attracts a lot of attention, but also a lot of critisism.

Take the points raised on this post and answer them - fair enough?
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 11:14
Hi,

You have a paranoid beef. I am so glad you failed to become a Hiarcs beta tester - but I guess that is part of the reason for your current attitude.

I wonder why some people here are frightened to post under their real names?

You have still not in any of your posts told me why you did not ask Mark about your concerns when you interviewed him - or was it because you thought that doing the interview would get you betas to show off with on playchess? Now Rybka is here and no betas to test - you are now converted to Rybkaism - that is fine - its a great engine with a nice team.

btw you are invited to the next old engines match Hiarcs 1983 v Chess Challenger - this sunday(1100 CB server time). As is everybody else. I know Jeroen had a good time watching the last 1.

As far as answering you it was done perfectly in 2 other posts I could not have written better so here they are again:

I don't understand your diatribe here.  You are ranting and raving about nothing.  If any or all of the things you quote were lies then you would have something legitimate to complain about.  Adveritising is to reach the masses with as much positive information as possible about your product.  There is no telling which one (piece of info) will snag a customer.  If Ford advertises their Mustang has a 300 hp engine that's not to say nobody else does.  It's simply one of the many selling points.   Many customers would not know this if not told.
Evidently you have some kind of beef with the Hiarcs people.  I don't know what it is but nothing you posted here justifies it.  And now you have my opinion.
Jim
Reply ToDo Report
Parent - -/- By Milton (*) [us] Date 2007-05-21 23:40
Jim,

I completely agree with your comments here.  The Hiarcs website advertises its product.  As with all advertisements, the statements on the Hiarcs webpage serve to place this product in the best light.  There would certainly be a problem if Hiarcs promoters made statements such as "Hiarcs has been proved to be the strongest chess program" because this would be clearly untrue.  However, there is nothing wrong with general statements implying that Hiarcs provides "world class analysis", or any of the other statements cited by Werewolf.
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 13:38
I want to set the record straight.

First, most (not all, but most) of what H. Wlliamson has said above about me is COMPLETE RUBBISH. Notice how he resorts to personal attacks rather than objective discussions. Nothing warrented that, I merely suggested he answer people's concerns in one go and then we can move on. However, a child will always say "you're a xxxx" rather than actually answer the question.

Secondly, most of what he has said will probably be meaningless to most people reading this so I'll fill in the details. I often do chess computer testing as most people on this site do. I have no bias to any one program, as is typical of people who like testing. 2 years ago I did some tests on hiarcs 8 which I was dissapointed with and hiarcs 10 which I was very pleased with so I wrote an article for Selective Search magazine about it. I did NOT (I think) at any time ask to be a beta tester but did say I'd be happy to test anything. That applied to hiarcs, it was addressed to its author (not to Harvey - didn't even know him then) and that's exactly what happened. I continued testing with that prog and with others. Work increased and the spare machine in the office got sold so the results dropped off, but the testing continues. During the next few years I exchanged some comments over playchess with harvey usually about hiarcs, latest developments etc.

So you see I am neither paranoid nor wanting to be  a hiarcs beta tester. You, however, are happy to write anything about anyone if it suits you.

p.s I did answer you, scroll down.

 
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 13:47
Hi Carl,

Ok you did know me - as before you interviewed Mark you asked me on playchess if I had any comments to make before you did the interview. You also told me with great delight that you were about to be a beta tester. btw you make a lot of comments about H11 for someone who has never purchased it?!

Yes i saw your answer but you did not answer the question.

You also said this in an email:

"I am now convinced that
Hiarcs is the best engine for the majority of users, regardless of
strength". It would be interesting if you were to quote this direct, on
your website"


so we will probably put this on the website today - thanks for the quote!

Harvey
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 14:05 Edited 2007-05-22 14:08
I'm not sure what you're doing is legal and you are misrepresenting me.

I did NOT say I was going to be a BETA tester - I might have said I was testing it but not as beta tester.

I DID answer your question - it was not part of the agenda of the review and I hadn't seen the hiarcs site at that time anyway.

When I said I didn't know you I meant after h8 and before h10.

The quote you have digged up refers to h10 not to h11/11.1. I CERTAINLY no longer believe it is the best engine, rybka is.

This is RIDICULOUS, this discussion belongs in private, email if you want. Since you know so much about me why not pop in after work for a coffee - knowing you you probably have my address, weight, hair colour, etc on file.
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 14:16 Edited 2007-05-22 15:04
Thanks for the offer of a coffee but i don't think so - i wont answer any more of your posts and i doubt Mark or Eric will either.

You are making stuff up as you go along - but thx for the quote we might just use it.

You can take legal advice if you wish - but here is some for free - you will waste a lot of money.

Shall i paste the beta test quotes? - No I wont I have them but you can answer this post as you like I am ending this, apologies to Vas for spamming his forum with all this.

I just re-read your post - where you say you had never read the Hiarcs website before you wrote the article - are you sure?

Best Wishes,

Harvey
Parent - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 15:31
OK, you're right lets end it.

Harvey to you personally: I am sorry for offending you. I did not mean to and this post is not about you (or me). It was purely about well...the title of the post!
Parent - - By stvs (***) Date 2007-05-24 09:39 Edited 2007-05-24 09:43
whats up harvey you share  private emails to public? nice work you are best partner to graham
thats is a prove of this company.public private emails without permission?????????????? good jobs little dictactors
the moderators of this forum how let public private emails without permission??
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-24 15:38
Hi Vas and Mods,

I am very sorry that these people are messing up your forum. Please feel free to delete any posts I have made which offend.

As long as they are not the quotes from Allo Allo that Jeroen and I enjoy so much ;-)

Best Wishes,

Harvey
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-05-25 07:29
Hi Harvey,

I'm not a mod here, anyway it is also possible to edit your own posts. The mods here are mostly hands-off ..

Vas
Parent - By Graham Banks (*****) Date 2007-05-25 10:57
nice work you are best partner to graham

Meaning?
Parent - - By nuff (**) Date 2007-05-22 12:37
I have scrutinised Hiarcs that's why you should answer some of the issues raised.

- Does Hiarcs have a forum of its own?
- That website has been like that for a very long time. Isn't it time it had a makeover?
- There are issues with activation
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 14:01
Does Hiarcs have a forum of its own? - No!
- That website has been like that for a very long time. Isn't it time it had a makeover? - maybe
- There are issues with activation - ok

What has any of this got to do with the crap from Werewolf?

He emailed us with this not that long ago:

"I am now convinced that
Hiarcs is the best engine for the majority of users, regardless of
strength". It would be interesting if you were to quote this direct, on
your website"
Parent - - By nuff (**) Date 2007-05-22 14:38
Instead of trying to be a "puff daddy" get cracking on tackling the issues raised. No one wants more propaganda from Hiarcs, we need less own trumpet blowing and more results.
Parent - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 14:41
If someone I have respect for agrees with you then I may take a few minutes to think about it.
Parent - - By Antonio_Espinosa (*) Date 2007-05-18 10:59
I suppose that HIARCS 11.1(using opening book) vs Ribka 2.3(no opening book) will end with the same result, 1-0 :)
To demostrate that Ribka 2.3 is better than HIARCS 11.1, you have to organize a match of almost 20 games between this two chess titans, using the same opening book (I recommend you PowerBook 2007) for both engines....
I think that Hiarcs 11.1 is the strongest chess engine (apart Rybka 2.3), so a match between them will be interesting (20 games at FIDE time control 1h30+30s)
My prediction: 11,5 - 8,5 for Rybka 2.3
Parent - - By premraj_n (**) Date 2007-05-18 11:07
My Prediction would be 15.0 - 5.0 for Rybka. And i think Zap!chess zanzibar x64 or Zappa zanzibar x64 would be much better opponent for Rybka.
Parent - - By Antonio_Espinosa (*) Date 2007-05-18 11:57
Zap Chess Zanzibar? :)
On my respectable notebook, a core 2duo 2.3 GHz 2GB Ram and Windows Vista, chess zanzibar reveal his genesis: Antonie Cozzie isn't a good chessplayer, but only an engineer. Infact Zap Chess Zanzibar 32bit isn't stronger than Fritz 10 or Junior 10.1
Deep Fritz 10 vs Zap Chess Zanzibar: 9,5 -10,5
Deep Junior 10.1 vs Zap Chess Zanzibar: 9 -10
HIARCS 11.1 vs Zap Chess Zanzibar: 12 - 8

And on my desktop PC(Pentium 4 3,2 GHz 1GB Ram) Zap Chess Zanzibar is losing on all fronts.
Only under 64bit Zap Chess Zanzibar is a very strong engine...

I'm planning a match between HIARCS 11.1 and Rybka 2.3
I will post the results here
Parent - - By premraj_n (**) Date 2007-05-21 16:43
I just want to tell you that Zap!chess zanzibar requires minimum quad cpu(and for it alone) and meant for long time control.
Its not for single core or dual core where it cannot play really strong.If u have 8cores or more it scales better than others(Info given by a friend).
So there is meaning in making it play engine match on your laptop.
Parent - - By Antonio_Espinosa (*) Date 2007-05-21 19:04
well, maybe I was not able to explain my "project".
My interest on chess engine is not connected with full performance...
I was the first to recognize that on a powerful 64 bit hardware Zap! Chess Zanzibar became a strong engine, maybe the strongest. But there is a Core2 Duo 32 bit on my notebook: so I'll obtain "weak" home analysis using Zanzibar, because on my notebook HIARCS 11.1 or Deep Fritz 10 are stronger than Zanzibar; in this group I don't add Rybka 2.3 because, even if Rybka is probably the strongest engine, she has still some bugs and I also dislike her "slow profile" number evaluation of the position (but this is a question of taste).
I'm not interested on topics like "researching the strongest chess engine in the world": where is the utility? When I find the strongest engine in the world, I won't resolve my analysis question, because there are some engines (HIARCS, Fritz 10, Rybka) that work well on normal hardware, and there are some others (Zanzibar, Junior) that need powerful hardware....
So, if you have got a Pentium III 32bit, and you buy Zanzibar, you make a big bistake, because on Pentium III 32bit even Fritz 8 is stronger than Zanzibar...Ok, Zanzibar is considered strong like Zeus on rating standings, but on your PC is shit...
So, I'm focusing on the strongest chess engine for Core2 Duo: I'll made my analysis on this hardware, and I hope that my posts can help chess amateurs who wants to discover which is the best engine for Core2 Duo.

P.S. But Cozzie, developping an engine that works well only on quad core (owned by 1% of chess users), is a genius or a bit stupid? :)
Parent - By premraj_n (**) Date 2007-05-21 19:12
I heard Cozzie is not interested in chess engine making or market.
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-05-22 14:23 Edited 2007-05-22 14:26
Zap works better on fast hardware but it is also a strong engine on 32 bit machines with one processor
Zap is clearly stronger than fritz8 and your claim that even fritz8 is better is simply wrong.
I can add that even Junior10.1 2 processors is not significantly stronger than zap 32 bits based on the cegt list

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_40%20Rating%20List/40_40%20All%20Versions/rangliste.html

From the CEGT rating list:

41 Fritz 10 2831 11 11 2741 56.2 % 2787 34.4 %
50 Deep Junior 10.1 2CPU 2809 18 18 989 44.4 % 2848 34.4 %
57 Zap!Chess Zanzibar w32 1CPU 2796 21 21 573 50.3 % 2794 43.3 %
97 Fritz 8 Bilbao 2712 10 10 3197 55.5 % 2674 31.0 %

Note also that Fritz8 is not weak and is stronger than some commercial engines and I will not say that people who buy smarthink or ruffian or gandalf make a huge mistake(it is their decision and not everybody is interested in playing strength)

101 SmarThink 1.00 2701 13 13 1831 45.3 % 2734 30.4 %
128 Gandalf 6.0 2659 7 7 5821 47.6 % 2676 33.4 %
133 Ruffian 2.1.0 2649 9 9 3828 47.8 % 2664 35.3 %

Uri
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-05-18 11:33
Maybe you can test hiarcs in different positions

This position is from one of my tournament games(I give also the game in the end of this post)

I remember that old rybka needed a long time to find Kf6 and prefered Ke4

I tried latest rybka and she also does not find Kf6 in a reasonable time.
It may be interesting if hiarcs can find quickly moves that a patzer like me(only 1975 fide rating) found easily on the board.

If it can it has more human style then rybka in this position.

501: Boris Kenler - Uri Blass, 38'/40+38'/40+38'/40
8/8/6p1/PR3k1p/r5p1/6K1/7P/8 b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 2.3.1 32-bit :

53...Kf5-e4
  µ  (-0.71)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
53...Kf5-e4
  ³  (-0.70)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
53...Kf5-e4
  ³  (-0.69)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4
  µ  (-0.71)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a2
  µ  (-0.85)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  2kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a2 55.Rb5-c5
  µ  (-0.87)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  3kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a2 55.Rb5-c5 Ke4-d4
  µ  (-0.87)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  3kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.Rb5-c5 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rc5-g5 Ra3-a2+ 57.Kf2-g3
  µ  (-0.97)   Depth: 9   00:00:00  12kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kf2-g2
  µ  (-1.01)   Depth: 10   00:00:00  18kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4
  µ  (-1.05)   Depth: 11   00:00:01  28kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 58.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.98)   Depth: 12   00:00:01  36kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 58.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 59.Rg6-g5
  µ  (-1.01)   Depth: 13   00:00:01  61kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 58.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 59.Rg6-g5 Ra5-c5
  µ  (-1.01)   Depth: 14   00:00:01  79kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 58.Kf2-e3 Ra5-d5 59.Ke3-f4 Rd5-d8 60.Rg6-c6+
  µ  (-0.99)   Depth: 15   00:00:01  143kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.94)   Depth: 16   00:00:02  194kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 58.Kf2-e3 Ra5-d5 59.Rg6-c6+ Kc4-b5 60.Rc6-c8
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 17   00:00:03  293kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 18   00:00:23  1728kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 58.Kf2-e3 Ra5-d5 59.Rg6-c6+ Kc4-b4 60.Rc6-c8
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 19   00:00:27  2054kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 58.Kf2-e3 Ra5-d5 59.Rg6-c6+
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 20   00:00:32  2511kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-g2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kg2-f2 Kc4-b4 58.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 59.Kf2-e3 Ra5-f5 60.Ke3-e4
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 21   00:00:48  4028kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-g2 Ke4-d4 56.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 57.Kg2-f2 Kc4-b4 58.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 22   00:00:53  4458kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 g6-g5 56.h4xg5 h5-h4 57.Rb5-b4+ Ke4-f5 58.g5-g6 g4-g3+ 59.Kf2-g2 Ra3-a2+ 60.Kg2-f3
  µ  (-0.94)   Depth: 23   00:01:42  9358kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 60.Kf2-e3
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 24   00:02:05  11181kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Rg5xg6 Ra3xa5 60.Kf2-e3
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 25   00:02:26  12993kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 60.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 26   00:03:18  17330kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 60.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 27   00:04:06  21635kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 60.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 28   00:05:23  28230kN
53...Kf5-e4 54.h2-h4 Ra4-a3+ 55.Kg3-f2 Ke4-f4 56.Rb5-b4+ Kf4-e5 57.Rb4-b5+ Ke5-d4 58.Rb5-g5 Kd4-c4 59.Kf2-g2 Kc4-b4 60.Rg5xg6
  µ  (-0.92)   Depth: 29   00:07:40  39778kN

(,  18.05.2007)

[Event "38'/40+38'/40+38'/40"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2006.05.15"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Boris Kenler"]
[Black "Uri Blass"]
[Result "*"]
[ECO "A30"]
[Annotator ",agur"]
[PlyCount "142"]
[TimeControl "40/2280:40/2280:40/2280"]

{512MB, Fritz8.ctg, URI-AMD} 1. Nf3 Nf6 2. g3 g6 3. b3 Bg7 4. Bb2 O-O 5. Bg2 c5
6. c4 Nc6 7. O-O b6 8. d4 cxd4 9. Nxd4 Bb7 10. e4 Nxd4 11. Qxd4 d6 12. f3 Qc7
13. Qd2 b5 14. Na3 Qc5+ 15. Kh1 b4 16. Bd4 Nxe4 17. Bxc5 Nxd2 18. Bxb4 Nxf1 19.
Rxf1 a5 20. Bd2 Rfc8 21. Re1 Kf8 22. Bg5 f6 23. Bd2 f5 24. Bg5 Rc7 25. Nb5 Rd7
26. a4 d5 27. c5 e5 28. Bc1 e4 29. g4 fxg4 30. fxe4 dxe4 31. Nd6 Bc6 32. Bxe4
Bxe4+ 33. Rxe4 Re7 34. Rc4 Be5 35. Ne4 Rb8 36. Bh6+ Ke8 37. Bg5 Rd7 38. Nd2 Rd4
39. Rc1 Bf4 40. Bxf4 Rxf4 41. Nc4 Rxb3 42. c6 Rxc4 43. Rxc4 Kd8 44. c7+ Kc8 45.
Rc5 Rb2 46. Rxa5 Kxc7 47. Rg5 Rb4 48. a5 Ra4 49. Kg2 Kd7 50. Kg3 Ke6 51. Rb5 h5
52. Rb6+ (52. Kh4 Kf6 (52... Ra2 53. Kg5) 53. Rb6+ Kg7 54. a6 Kh6 55. Kg3 Ra5
56. Kf4 Ra3 57. Rd6) 52... Kf5 53. Rb5+ Kf6 54. Rb6+ Kg5 55. Rb5+ Kh6 56. Rc5
Ra3+ 57. Kg2 h4 58. Kf2 Ra2+ 59. Kg1 h3 60. Rb5 g5 61. Rb6+ Kh5 62. a6 Ra1+ 63.
Kf2 Rh1 64. a7 Rxh2+ 65. Ke3 Ra2 66. Rb7 Kh4 67. Kd4 g3 68. Ke3 g2 69. Kf3 g4+
70. Kf4 Ra4+ 71. Kf5 g1=Q *
Parent - - By diskamyl (**) Date 2007-05-18 13:28
(don't you think 1975 fide rating shows you are above patzer level? I'd define patzer to be in 1200-1600 range)
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-05-18 13:55
Everything is relative

Relative to rybka I am a patzer.

Uri
Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-05-18 14:30
What is the point of playing Hiarcs without an opening book and Rybka with an opening book?  Are you implying that human like play is without opening books?  What did you expect to prove with a single game?  Just for your information, the opening book is designed to prevent positions like that. (among other things)  And finally, if I were Hiarcs programmer I would stop advertising the "human like play".  To me that simply means making blunders and acting like an ass when you lose. (just check ICC for the afore mentioned behavior)
Parent - - By billyraybar (***) Date 2007-05-18 14:45
Of course I expected Hiarcs to lose without an opening book.  I wasn't trying to prove anything this this game - I posted it because I found it illustrative and comical. 
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-18 18:03
There are numerous issues with Hiarcs' reputation at the moment. The whole fiasco with the free software advertising not counting (I can't bear to go over that again, but I am certain I was right) there is also the slogans around the program that are misleading.

e.g: "A chess program that does more than calculate"
- what, doesn't Fritz etc do this too?

"variety of opponents and chess strength"
- all the main progs have this. The info is presented in a way which suggests the rest don't

"world class analysis"
- it's good, granted, but so are the others. Therefore this doesn't seem to be a reason to chose Hiarcs over the rest which is precisly the section of their website it's in

"defeats all Mac rivals with ease"
Well the 2nd strongest program is Shredder 9, I believe. Although it's true that hiarcs would win a match V shredder 9 somebody new to chess would read that statement along the lines of 'hiarcs wins every game with ease' and that is not even CLOSE to the truth. I wonder if they'll change that comment when the new shredder / rybka come out for the mac?

Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-05-21 21:46
I don't understand your diatribe here.  You are ranting and raving about nothing.  If any or all of the things you quote were lies then you would have something legitimate to complain about.  Adveritising is to reach the masses with as much positive information as possible about your product.  There is no telling which one (piece of info) will snag a customer.  If Ford advertises their Mustang has a 300 hp engine that's not to say nobody else does.  It's simply one of the many selling points.   Many customers would not know this if not told.
Evidently you have some kind of beef with the Hiarcs people.  I don't know what it is but nothing you posted here justifies it.  And now you have my opinion.
Jim
Parent - - By Milton (***) Date 2007-05-21 23:40
Jim,

I completely agree with your comments here.  The Hiarcs website advertises its product.  As with all advertisements, the statements on the Hiarcs webpage serve to place this product in the best light.  There would certainly be a problem if Hiarcs promoters made statements such as "Hiarcs has been proved to be the strongest chess program" because this would be clearly untrue.  However, there is nothing wrong with general statements implying that Hiarcs provides "world class analysis", or any of the other statements cited by Werewolf.  Hiarcs is not obligated to make statements regarding their program that are neutral and objective.  That's not the way advertisement works.

Milton
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 00:05 Edited 2007-05-22 00:34
Hi Jim & Milton,

I agree with your comments. 

We think we know why he has a beef - but am not going to go into that here. I can say that the slogan(and other parts of the website) he mentions have been around for years and when he did an interview for Selective Search, after H10 release, with Mark - Werewolf did not seem to raise any concerns at that time!?

Best Wishes,

Harvey
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:17 Edited 2007-05-22 06:27
This is too coincidental. three posts of exactltly the same nature at the same time? Do you three know each other?

"we think we know why he has a beef" - what are you talking about???

Harvey I am dissapointed. Instead of actually reading what I am saying and the way it is meant you are trying to twist my statements into a...rant? Well you guys really are magicians of media!

I am being plain and straightforward, like everyone else on this page. I didn't start this topic. I am not out to "get " hiarcs. I DO like the way hiarcs plays. I DONT like the way hiarcs is advertised which, in my opinion, is increasingly misleading and I am NOT alone on this point, as you can clearly see. e.g. "A program that does more than calculate". OK, at the point of hiarcs 3 onwards....yep fair enough. Today, can you say your competitors are mere calculators? Is fritz just the number cruncher it once was?

The poll was created on a website which is not hiarcs'. the comments are numerous and by numerous different people. Now try and turn that into a "someone's saying bad things about hiarcs"
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:24
I don't need to say anything - your doing a great job of advertising Hiarcs all by yourself.

Thanks,

Harvey
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:28
oh really? then you really haven't read my posts.
and why complain?
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:32
get some therapy - read the post - that was my conclusion.

Also a marketing course might help!?
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:35
Resorting to insults. Well done Harvey, another own goal.
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:38
lol

Here is a question then that you did not answer - If this concerns you so much - why did you not ask Mark about it when you interviewed him?

Harvey
Parent - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 06:52
OK, I will answer your question, even though you did not answer my points.

The interview was at a time when Hiarcs was (arguably) the best chess program. I did the interview with one aim: to help people see a distinction between a,b,c,d,e which could appear to a newbie to be identical. It was done as a FAVOUR...you can call it free advertising if you want. My agenda was the one and only trump hiarcs had - it's playing style. I was not concerned with its elo since even in the pre-rybka days it wasn't top. But it played aggressive chess, and still does. It was also surprisingly quick at tactics for such a low node count, so I drew attention to that.

Anyway it doesn't concern me "so much". It's just that someone has created a post on hiarcs with similar feelings to my own, so I contributed. If someone had posted saying "look hiarcs is the only prog to find Bh7+! - isn't this great" I would have contributed to that too, positively.

We do have the right to express our opinions....
Parent - By stvs (***) Date 2007-05-24 09:54
hey let the nazi-theatre company harvey-graham-terry-richard to insults people, without insults and propaganda they dont live.
Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-05-22 16:04 Edited 2007-05-22 16:07
Hello Werewolf,
I don't know you or any of the other posters here.  But look at this quote by you:

"Today, can you say your competitors are mere calculators? Is fritz just the number cruncher it once was?"

These kind of statements show where your anger is misplaced.  Since you are the only one making the statements you should be mad at yourself for saying them.  These statements are not implied by Hiarcs advertisements.  They are figments of your imagination.  You should learn to take the advertising statements exactly as they are written and not add your own spin to them.

I would also like to add that I'm a fan of Hiarcs & Shredder as well as Rybka.  They are all great engines and I admire the people who programmed them.
Jim
Parent - - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 16:26
Jim,
You're 67 years old so I'll be gentle, but you're wrong:
I am not angry - you have added that.
I am not the only one making these statements - please read all the posts.

Hiarcs does not win every game with ease on the mac.

I am also an (engine) fan of hiarcs, shredder Rybka, Fritz and Junior.

Thanks for your contributions Jim, I hope the weather is nice in the U.S
Parent - - By Jim Walker (***) Date 2007-05-22 19:21
Well you're at it again.

"Hiarcs does not win every game with ease on the mac. "

Where did the Hiarcs ad say that? 
You say you're not angry but you keep putting a spin on the Hiarcs promotion and then you complain about the spin which did not come from Hiarcs but from you.  You need to stop reading something into the words that are not there.  Only an angry person would twist someone else's words and then use the twisted words as an excuse to put them down.
I live in Florida and the weather here is beautiful this time of year.  So are the beaches.  If you've never been to these beaches you are truely missing something.  The sand is white as sugar and the Gulf of Mexico is breathtaking.  I've been to Waikiki but I prefer these beaches anytime.  (Surfers prefer the waves on the Oahu north shore)  :)
Jim
Parent - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-05-22 21:04
Hi Jim,
Yes I've been there, the beaches are very nice. We found the weather a bit too hot and it was also quite windy but the water was great. Air-con seems to be standard issue so that was nice too. I love the "you're welcome" you get with anything over there when you says thanks for something. We just don't get that over here.

re: your point: I am and was not angry. I know you THINK I am but, I can assure you, I am not. I can't seem to communicate that to either you or Harvey that it's not a personal thing. What I was trying to say was this: A friend looked at the website. They saw the mac quote. OK - I pointed them there - I admit that. I asked them how they interpreted it. After a pause (my friend is a chessplayer but not a strong one) they concluded that any opposition hiarcs encountered would be "easily beaten" and when I asked what that meant they said hiarcs would always win v opposition. That is factually incorrect. Now I realise that was someone else's interpretation. I realise that it doesn't ACTUALLY say hiarcs would win every single game. But in a grey way it gives off that vibe and that was misleading.

Anyway...me and Harvey have had a wonderful 24 hours keeping the masses amused. We'll probably go out for a drink later and go bowling or something like that, you know chew the fat, catch up on old times. (probably best if we put this one to bed...)
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-05-18 18:48
Computers are better than humans but there are still positions when they are worse than humans when humans find better moves.

I understand that the point of human like play is that the program has less positions when it choose worse moves than humans.
Uri
Parent - By RFK (Gold) Date 2007-05-18 18:19
Although, I have said this before-I am going to say this again. The controversy will end, conclusively, when Convekta comes out with a Rybka GUI;  a Box loaded with a litany of Rybka Wins -against Hiarcs, Fritz and/or any other chess engines history will be self evident. There will be no where else to run. Rybka at present only has this Forum. 

I am willing to bet that you are going to see a circus of "fraudulent"  propaganda before Rybka GUI is released.

I hope Rybka trounces all of them at Leiden.

sidserioius-
Parent - - By exigentsky (***) Date 2007-05-18 19:04
In my experience, it really does play more like a human. It seems to handle the initiative and prophylactic play more naturally. For example, it understands that e6 is the best move after Bg5or Bc4 in the Najdorf. It also sees the strength of the Maroczy bind against the Accelerated Dragon. In some cases it's even better than Rybka. (especially kingside attacks) This is why I find that just because Rybka is stronger doesn't mean HIARCS is useless. Plus, it is still very strong, just below Zap!Chess at #3 and Zap!Chess isn't even developed anymore. Of course, if I had to have only one engine and Rybka worked on my Mac, Rybka would still be it
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Hiarcs Propaganda?
1 2 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill