Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Human + machine
- - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-02 20:42
Hi,
we have been discussing how much elo points can add the human to the programm but may be we shall discuss the question
how much elo could add the programm to the human ?
It is opposite :-). What is Your opinion ?
Regards
Hetman.
Parent - - By Lee Ma Hong (**) Date 2007-08-03 01:25
I believe this has been touched already, when discussing how much Elo points can be added to correspondence players' rating by using engines during play.
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-03 16:16
Thanks Lee. I have meant sth else but it is interesting as well. Could you direct me to that thread, please ?
Rgds
Hetman
Parent - - By lkaufman (*****) Date 2007-08-03 04:43
The right way to look at it is how many points can the weaker player add to the stronger one by "helping". If we are talking about any of today's top programs on good hardware, they are clearly stronger than the human (no matter who), so it makes no sense to talk about how many points are added to the human. If you are rated 1100 and Rybka helps you, it will raise your rating by 2000 points as long as you follow her advice!
Parent - - By Zruty (*****) Date 2007-08-03 07:20

>If you are rated 1100 and Rybka helps you, it will raise your rating by 2000 points as long as you follow her advice!


But can I get rating of 3300 by 'directing' Rybka's chess power? That's in my opinion what Hetman wants to know.
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-08-03 12:09
The way to calculate this is to figure out the strength of your hardware + software and then add in your human-help bonus (or penalty).

Vas
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-03 16:48
Thanks Zruty.
I am sure that with Rybka I will not get 3000 CC rating.
Rgds
Hetman
Parent - - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-03 16:46
I think that the right view shall be- programm is for the human not the human for the programm,otherwise we could find ourselves in the SF visions world where the machines are fighting against people i.e. Terminator 1 & 2 :-).

The opinion concerning the power of the programms is true but partially only. It is right in quick and normal time control but in correspondence play  the matters look otherwise. I do not know how advanced are you in the correspondence chess but here  are many examples when chess programm (even the strongest one) is going from the equal middlegame to the lost or very difficult  endgame. Here the human assistance is being  important.

So my question is  how much elo  to the player elo could add the programm is up to date. I am sure that better player with the programm will have the better chances then weaker player and the same programm. It is proven. There are being not only draws in the CC tournaments even on the top level. Human is playing about 200-300 elo better when does have a board and possibility to move pieces for and back and more time. So who is weaker where is to discuss.
So if I would have been rated 1100 my rating will raise probably to the 2400 maximum in correspondece play but if I am rated 2500 what is the result and formula ? ;-).
I think the test is easy. You are IM so ICCF will let you play at 2300 CC level. You can use Rybka only moves and you will see the reality. There is  the possibility to organise the demo match Rybka vs ICCF GM, as well. There are demo matches  between ICCF and OTB GM's.

Regards
Hetman
Parent - - By lkaufman (*****) Date 2007-08-03 19:36
     I don't have experience with correspondence play. As far as I know, there is no such thing anymore as a correspondence rating for a human, because most of them are using engines (whether allowed or not). My point is that if you are a weak player, you can hardly expect to do any better using Rybka than if you just let Rybka play the game. In other words, you have to be at least close to master strength (I would think) for human+Rybka to play noticeably better than just Rybka. But if you are a strong player, let's say over 2000, then the combination will play better than Rybka, and for every hundred points of increase in player strength, there will be some lesser increase in the combined rating, which might be on average something like 20 points (this number itself will increase with the player's strength).
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-08-03 20:09
I disagree that you have to be at least close to master strength for human+rybka to play noticeably better than just rybka.
Even weak humans can detect forced line and analyze what happens after them and it is important in correspondence chess.

I think that even 1600 elo can easily get at least 50 elo better than rybka in correspondence games if they work with her correctly.
Note that using other engines is also part of the work in tactical positions and there may be cases when they can find that another engine that is not rybka suggest a better move.

It is the best to give most of the time for rybka to analyze and to reject rybka's moves only when you are sure about your decision also based on analysis with rybka.

Uri
Parent - By h1a8 (***) Date 2007-08-04 02:06
Why disagree when you are only talking about correspondence chess.
I assure you that most here are just thinking about the question as it relates timed chess (like blitz or maybe tournament controls).

And in time control chess I assure you that a 1600 will lose badly if he/she deviates from rybka. Thus easily being weaker than rybka alone.
Parent - - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-04 05:20
I am not master strength but I think I am able to add some Elo points while analysing with Rybka when I am using preserve analysis :-) option.
20 points increase  for every 100 over 2000. It was your idea ?
Regards
Hetman
Parent - - By lkaufman (*****) Date 2007-08-04 12:59
Yes, my idea. Of course other factors than rating enter into the equation. As Uri rightly points out, even a weak player can play better with Rybka than Rybka by herself if he is highly skilled at the use of engines for analysis; perhaps even someone who doesn't know how to play chess at all could become good at this. The ability to make the most out of a chess engine is a special skill that has little to do with chess ability; that's why for me correspondence chess has no interest nowadays, although it does produce excellent chess.
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-05 08:49
Is it possible that someone could be skilled in analysing with chess engines without knowing chess , how you imagine that ? I doubt, personally in it and I do not agree with Uri although I do not have 2600 cc rating. If he is playing like he writes he is  unsatisfied, probably.

The different engines or options in the engine could give differrent estimations. The person not knowing chess is being powerless in such a circumstances.
The person rated ;-) 1100 shall have difficulties with helping the machine. You are too pessimistic concernig the correspondence chess or I am too optimistic but... the iccf WC  van Osteroom was being good direct and cc player in the time before computers years.
The cc chess was changed by computers like other things i.e. direct chess play is infulenced either.
You never know if you are playing against human or against variation prepared by computer.

Regards
Hetman
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-08-05 13:49
Larry,

you can definitely strengthen Rybka without being master strength by basically using interactive analysis to re-prioritize the top of her search tree.

It's hard to put this into Elo terms, because this skill doesn't overlap perfectly (or even that well) with Elo, but Rybka's ability to prioritize the top of her search tree is probably somewhere in the 1600-1800 area.

Vas
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-08-03 20:02
I think that correspondence players with no computer help are significantly weaker than computers.

Correspondence games in the high level are computer games with some human help and not the opposite.

It is not proven that the better player with the program will have better chances.
It may be the opposite.

There are cases when
the weaker player may trust more the machine because at least he knows that he is weak when there are cases when the better player will not trust the machine and play weaker moves.

Humans are playing better with more time but the same is for computers.
long time control may help the computer because program never get tired when humans need to sleep so practically the program can use more time when in OTB game human can use the same time as the program.

I think that rybka 32 bit single processor is already enough for iccf rating of at least 2500(assuming you use it 24 hours per move and more than 24 hours per move in the endgame after you finish most of your games)
My guess is that rybka 64 bit on a fast machine in the same conditions is probably enough for iccf rating of at least 2600.

I have an iccf rating of more than 2600 and I do not believe that rybka get more than 100 elo improvement from the cases when I do not choose rybka's moves and I used in the tournament that I played only 32 bit version single processor and earlier shredder9 or fruit2.2.

Uri
Parent - - By bballplayer (**) Date 2007-08-03 23:35
How deep in terms of ply does rybka go when you leave it for 24 hour per move analysis?
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-08-04 13:26
It is dependent on the position but she often can get 30 plies based on my experience.

Here is an example from an old analysis on a machine that is not fast(I have not access here to latest analysis)

Milan Mraz - Uri Blass
3q2k1/p3b1p1/1p2P3/6p1/P5B1/2r2P2/4R1K1/1Q6 b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.2n 32-bit:

34...Bd6
  =  (-0.25)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
34...Qd4
  ³  (-0.32)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
34...Qd4
  ³  (-0.26)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
34...Qe8
  ³  (-0.40)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
34...Qe8 35.Qd1
  =  (-0.19)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
34...Rd3 35.Bf5
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
34...Rd3 35.Bf5 Rd1
  =  (-0.25)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
34...Rd3 35.Bf5 Rd1 36.Qe4
  =  (-0.21)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  15kN
34...Rd3 35.Bf5 Rd1 36.Qe4 Qc7
  =  (-0.16)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  29kN
34...Rd3 35.Bf5 Rd1 36.Qe4 Qb8 37.Qc2
  =  (-0.13)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  50kN
34...Qd3 35.Qxd3 Rxd3 36.Rc2 Bc5 37.a5 Kf8
  =  (- 0.15)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  66kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Rd2 Rc7 38.Kg3
  =  (-0.15)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  103kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Rd2 Rc7 38.Rd7 Rxd7 39.exd7 Bf6
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 10   00:00:02  210kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Rd2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bc5+ 39.Ke2 Ke7
  =  (-0.19)   Depth: 11   00:00:02  273kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Rd2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bf6 39.Ke3 g6
  =  (-0.25)   Depth: 12   00:00:04  457kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Rd2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bf6 39.Ke3 g6 40.Ke4
  =  (-0.20)   Depth: 13   00:00:06  657kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 g6 37.Rd2 Kg7 38.Kf2 Kf6 39.Rd7 Ra3 40.Rb7 a6
  =  (-0.20)   Depth: 14   00:00:10  1205kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 g6 37.Rd2 Kg7 38.Kf2 Kf6 39.Rd7 Ra3 40.Rb7 a6 41.bxa6
  =  (-0.20)   Depth: 15   00:00:18  2082kN
34...Qd3 35.Qxd3 Rxd3 36.Rc2 Bc5 37.a5 Kf8 38.axb6 Bxb6 39.Kg3 Ke7 40.Bf5 Rd1 41.Rc6
  ³  (-0.35)   Depth: 16   00:01:04  7601kN
34...Qd3 35.Qxd3 Rxd3 36.Rc2 Bc5 37.a5 Kf8 38.axb6 Bxb6 39.Kg3 Ke7 40.Bf5 Rd1 41.Rc6
  ³  (-0.35)   Depth: 17   00:01:19  9965kN
34...Qd3 35.Qxd3 Rxd3 36.Rc2 Bc5 37.a5 Kf8 38.axb6 Bxb6 39.Rc8+ Ke7 40.Kf1 Rd8 41.Rxd8
  ³  (-0.35)   Depth: 18   00:01:50  14991kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bd6 39.Ke2 Ke7 40.Kd3 Be5 41.Rc2
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 19   00:02:52  26123kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bd6 39.Ke2 Ke7 40.Kd3 Be5 41.Rd2
  =  (-0.25)   Depth: 20   00:06:40  48355kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Rc7 38.Kf2 Bc5+ 39.Ke2 Ke7 40.Kd3 Kf6 41.Rc2
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 21   00:09:15  66905kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 22   00:16:37  120202kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 23   00:28:36  199808kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 24   00:49:50  335673kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 25   01:56:37  788345kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 26   02:48:56  1176643kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 27   04:38:52  1956645kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 28   08:28:50  3591290kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 29   14:48:59  2000165kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 30   27:44:11  3268049kN
34...Qd3 35.Qb5 Qxb5 36.axb5 Kf8 37.Ra2 Ra3 38.Rxa3 Bxa3 39.Kf2 Ke7 40.Ke3 g6 41.Ke4
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 31   50:17:48  1123950kN

(, MyTown 20.05.2006)
Parent - - By bballplayer (**) Date 2007-08-04 16:29
Ok thanks. How about in middlegame positions (on average).
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-08-05 11:15
I think that less than 30 plies but I used only old versions of rybka at that stage

Here are some analysis that I save

Uri Blass - Askell
3r1bk1/p2r3p/1p1Bq1p1/4P3/PQ6/3R3P/6P1/4R1K1 w - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.2n 32-bit:

38.h4
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
38.a5
  =  (0.21)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
38.a5
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
38.Red1
  =  (0.23)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
38.Red1 Rc7
  =  (0.23)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
38.Red1 Rc8 39.Rf1
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
38.Red1 Rc8 39.Rf1 Rcd8
  =  (0.06)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  8kN
38.a5 b5 39.Rd4 Be7
  =  (0.10)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  12kN
38.Rd4 Bh6 39.a5 bxa5
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  16kN
38.Rd4 Bh6 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  23kN
38.Rd4 Bh6 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Rd3
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  50kN
38.Rd4 Bh6 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Rd3 Bf4
  =  (0.09)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  86kN
38.Red1 Rc8 39.Qe4 Rc4 40.Qa8 Rf7 41.Bxf8
  =  (0.13)   Depth: 9   00:00:03  207kN
38.Red1 Bg7 39.Rd5 Bh6 40.Qe4 Rf7 41.Qh4 Be3+ 42.Kh1
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 10   00:00:08  477kN
38.Red1 Bg7 39.Rd4 Bh6 40.Re4 Rf7 41.a5 bxa5 42.Qxa5 Rc8
  =  (0.13)   Depth: 11   00:00:11  678kN
38.Rd4 Bh6 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Rd3 Bf4 42.Qb5 Rf7
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 11   00:00:12  795kN
38.Rd4 Rc8 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc2 41.Red1 Qa2 42.Qxa2+ Rxa2 43.Bxf8 Rxd4 44.Rxd4 Kxf8
  =  (0.11)   Depth: 12   00:00:28  1864kN
38.a5 bxa5 39.Qxa5 Qc4 40.Qa3 a5 41.Rc1 Qa6 42.Qb3+ Kh8 43.Rcd1 a4
  =  (0.20)   Depth: 12   00:00:43  2875kN
38.a5 bxa5 39.Qxa5 Qc4 40.Qa3 a5 41.Rc1 Bxd6 42.exd6 Qb5 43.Rcd1 a4 44.Qa2+ Kf8
  =  (0.13)   Depth: 13   00:00:46  3119kN
38.Rdd1 Rf7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Bxf8 Rcxf8 42.Qd5 Re8 43.Kh2 Kg7 44.Qxe6 Rxe6
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 13   00:01:03  4322kN
38.Rdd1 Rf7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Bxf8 Rcxf8 42.Qd5 Re8 43.Kh2 Kg7 44.Qxe6 Rxe6
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 14   00:01:21  5684kN
38.Rdd1 Rf7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Rc8 41.Bxf8 Rcxf8 42.Qd5 Re8 43.Kh2 Kg7 44.Qxe6 Rxe6
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 15   00:02:37  11449kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Rb1 Qc4 42.Bxe7 Qd4+ 43.Kh2 Rxe7 44.Re4 Qd5
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 16   00:04:11  18931kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Rb1 Qc4 42.Bxe7 Qd4+ 43.Kh2 Rxe7 44.Re4 Qd5
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 17   00:06:38  31101kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Bxd6 42.exd6 Rxd6 43.Qxd8+ Rxd8 44.Rxd8+ Kg7
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 18   00:19:09  92746kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Bxd6 42.exd6 Rxd6 43.Qxd8+ Rxd8 44.Rxd8+ Kg7
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 19   00:22:55  111733kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Rc8 42.Rf1 Qc4 43.Qa3 Qe6 44.Bxe7 Rxe7
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 20   00:57:29  282797kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Rc8 42.Rf1 Qc4 43.Qa1 Qe6 44.Qa3 Rcd8
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 21   01:18:20  383926kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Rc8 42.Rf1 Qc4 43.Qa1 Qe6 44.Qa3 Rcd8
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 22   04:14:52  1247398kN
38.Rdd1 Be7 39.a5 bxa5 40.Qxa5 Qb3 41.Kh1 Rc8 42.Qd2 Qe6 43.Qd4 Rcd8 44.Qb4 Bg5
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 23   05:42:51  1735085kN
38.Rdd1 Re8 39.Qb5 Rf7 40.Bxf8 Rexf8 41.Re4 Rf2 42.Qc4 Qxc4 43.Rxc4 Re2 44.Rc7 Rf7
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 24   18:47:49  1761649kN
38.Rd4 Re8 39.Rf1 Red8 40.Rfd1 Bh6 41.Re1 Bg5 42.a5 bxa5 43.Qxa5 Rc8 44.Rdd1 Rc2
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 24   26:52:25  120342kN
38.Rd4 Re8 39.Rf1 Red8 40.Rfd1 Bh6 41.R4d3 Bg7 42.Rd5 Bh6 43.Qd4 Bg7 44.Qc3 Bf8
  =  (0.16)   Depth: 25   34:02:26  2500228kN

kolzak,U - blass
nr5r/3nkp2/2Bp2p1/PP2pPbp/4P3/2q5/2P1QB1P/R2R3K b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.2n 32-bit:

27...gxf5
  ³  (-0.29)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
27...gxf5
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rbd8
  =  (-0.03)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
27...Nc7 28.a6
  =  (-0.04)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
27...Nc5 28.a6
  =  (-0.09)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
27...Nc5 28.a6 gxf5
  =  (-0.05)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
27...Nc5 28.a6 gxf5 29.a7 Rbg8
  =  (-0.06)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  10kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Nb6 29.a7 Rbf8 30.fxg6
  =  (-0.05)   Depth: 7   00:00:01  33kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Nb6 29.a7 Rbf8 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Ra2
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 8   00:00:02  48kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Nb6 29.a7 Rbf8 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Ra2 Bh6
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 9   00:00:03  101kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Nb6 29.a7 Rbf8 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Ra2 Kf6 32.Rda1
  =  (0.03)   Depth: 10   00:00:09  356kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rbd8 29.Be1 Qh3 30.Bb4 Rh6 31.Be4 Qh4
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 10   00:00:14  553kN
27...Rhg8 28.Be1 Qc5 29.Bf2 Qc3 30.Be1 Qc5 31.Bf2 Qc3 32.Be1 Qc5 33.Bf2 Qc3 34.Be1
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 10   00:00:21  834kN
27...Rhg8 28.Be1 Qh3 29.Bb4 Nc5 30.Bxc5 dxc5 31.fxg6 fxg6 32.Rd3 Qh4 33.b6
  =  (0.08)   Depth: 11   00:00:24  976kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rhg8 29.Ra4 Rbd8 30.Rd3 Qb2 31.b6 Rc8 32.Rc4
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 11   00:00:34  1357kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rhg8 29.Ra4 Rbd8 30.Rd3 Qb2 31.b6 Rc8 32.Rc4 Qa2
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 12   00:00:45  1798kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rhg8 29.Ra4 Rbd8 30.Rd3 Qb2 31.b6 Rc8 32.Rc4 Qa2 33.Ra4
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 13   00:01:01  2582kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rhg8 29.Ra4 Rbd8 30.Rd3 Qb2 31.b6 Rc8 32.Rc4 Qa2 33.Ra4 Qb2 34.Rc4
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 14   00:01:39  4551kN
27...gxf5 28.exf5 Rhg8 29.Ra4 Nc7 30.Bd4 Qh3 31.b6 Ne8 32.Bxd7 Kxd7 33.Bxe5 Qe3 34.Qxh5
  =  (0.16)   Depth: 15   00:04:40  13618kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Rbc8 29.a7 Bf4 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Be1 Qh3 32.Qg2 Qxg2+ 33.Kxg2 Rhf8 34.h4
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 15   00:07:00  19582kN
27...Nc5 28.a6 Rbc8 29.a7 Bf4 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Be1 Qh3 32.Qg2 Qxg2+ 33.Kxg2 Ne6 34.Bh4+
  =  (0.00)   Depth: 16   00:10:39  30432kN
27...Nc5 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Bxc5 Qxc5 30.Qg2 Bf6 31.Qxg6 Qf2 32.Rf1 Rbg8 33.Rxf2 Rxg6 34.a6
  ²  (0.33)   Depth: 17   00:21:21  64744kN
27...Bf4 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Be1 Qh3 30.Bb4 Nc5 31.Ra3 Qg4 32.Rf3 Rhf8 33.h3 Qe6
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 17   00:51:02  160062kN
27...Bf4 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Be1 Qh3 30.Bb4 Nc5 31.Ra3 Qg4 32.Rf3 Rhf8 33.h3 Qe6 34.a6
  =  (0.09)   Depth: 18   01:06:08  207524kN
27...Bf4 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Be1 Qh3 30.Bb4 Nc5 31.Bxc5 dxc5 32.Rd7+ Kf6 33.Rad1 Rhf8 34.a6
  =  (0.24)   Depth: 19   01:15:32  239479kN
27...Bf4 28.fxg6 fxg6 29.Be1 Qh3 30.Bb4 Nc5 31.Bxc5 dxc5 32.Rd7+ Kf6 33.Rad1 Rhf8 34.Qf2
  ²  (0.32)   Depth: 20   01:51:37  361707kN
27...Bf4 28.Be1 Qe3 29.Qxe3 Bxe3 30.fxg6 Rhg8 31.Bd2 Bxd2 32.gxf7 Rgf8 33.Rxd2 Rxf7 34.Rad1
  ²  (0.31)   Depth: 21   03:25:22  696428kN
27...Bf4 28.Be1 Qe3 29.Qxe3 Bxe3 30.fxg6 Rhg8 31.Bd2 Bxd2 32.gxf7 Rgf8 33.Rxd2 Nc5 34.Rf2
  ²  (0.30)   Depth: 22   06:05:38  1256609kN
27...Bf4 28.Be1 Qe3 29.Qg2 Rbg8 30.Bh4+ g5 31.Be1 Qc5 32.Rd5 Qc4 33.Rxd6 Nf6 34.Qh3
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 23   08:19:12  1758273kN
27...Rhc8 28.Ba7 Nf6 29.Bxb8 Rxb8 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Qd3 Qc5 32.Qa3 Be3 33.Qxc5 Bxc5 34.b6
  ²  (0.47)   Depth: 23   32:36:26  2682699kN
27...Rhc8 28.Ba7 Nf6 29.Bxb8 Rxb8 30.fxg6 fxg6 31.Qd3 Qc5 32.Qa3 Be3 33.Qxc5 Bxc5 34.b6
  ²  (0.48)   Depth: 24   38:19:57  3857506kN

New game - Rybka 1.1 32-bit
3r1k2/1p1n1pp1/p2b1n2/P2P3p/2B1pP2/1P2B2P/2r3P1/R1NR2K1 b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.1 32-bit:

22...Bc5
  ³  (-0.59)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
22...Bc5
  ³  (-0.60)   Depth: 3   00:00:01
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2
  ³  (-0.44)   Depth: 4   00:00:02
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2
  ³  (-0.48)   Depth: 5   00:00:05
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 e3
  ³  (-0.41)   Depth: 6   00:00:09  4kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne6 26.f5
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 7   00:00:21  11kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Bc7 25.Bd2
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 7   00:00:36  21kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Bc7 25.Bd2 Ke7
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 8   00:00:42  26kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Bc7 25.Bd2 Ke7 26.Nc3
  =  (-0.23)   Depth: 9   00:01:04  50kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Bc7 25.Bd2 Ke7 26.Kf2 h4
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 10   00:01:28  95kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Ke7 25.Kf2 Nc5 26.Rc1 Kd7 27.f5
  =  (-0.21)   Depth: 11   00:01:39  183kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 Bc5 25.Kf2 Ke7 26.Bxc5+ Rxc5 27.d6+ Ke8 28.Nc3 Rxa5 29.Re1
  =  (-0.18)   Depth: 12   00:01:43  373kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 h4 25.Kf2 Ke7 26.Nc3 Bb4 27.Ne2 Kd6 28.Nd4
  =  (-0.21)   Depth: 13   00:01:47  746kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 h4 25.Kf2 Nc5 26.Rc1 Nh5 27.b4 Nd7 28.b5 Ba3
  =  (-0.21)   Depth: 14   00:01:53  1226kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 h4 25.Kf2 g6 26.Rc1 Ke7 27.Nc3 Bb4 28.Bd4 Bxa5 29.d6+
  =  (-0.24)   Depth: 15   00:02:08  2363kN
22...Rc8 23.Ra2 Rxa2 24.Nxa2 h4 25.Kf2 g6 26.Rc1 Ke7 27.Nc3 Bb4 28.Bd4 Bxa5 29.d6+
  =  (-0.24)   Depth: 16   00:02:32  4377kN
22...Rc8 23.Kf1 Bc5 24.Bxc5+ Rxc5 25.Ne2 Ne8 26.d6 h4 27.Ke1 Nef6 28.Kf2 g5 29.Ke3
  =  (-0.24)   Depth: 17   00:05:31  18328kN
22...Rc8 23.Kf1 Bc5 24.Bxc5+ Rxc5 25.Ne2 Ne8 26.d6 h4 27.Nd4 Rb2 28.Be6 Nef6 29.Bxd7
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 18   00:07:14  26402kN
22...Rc8 23.Kf1 Bc5 24.Bxc5+ Rxc5 25.Ne2 Ne8 26.d6 h4 27.Nd4 Rb2 28.Be6 Nef6 29.Bxd7
  ³  (-0.30)   Depth: 19   00:11:56  48417kN
22...Rc8 23.Kf1 Bc5 24.Bxc5+ Rxc5 25.Ne2 Ne8 26.d6 h4 27.Nd4 Rb2 28.Be6 Nef6 29.Bxd7
  =  (-0.20)   Depth: 20   00:22:42  97714kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.b4 Nd7 27.Re1 Rc8 28.Bb3 Nd6 29.Re3
  ³  (-0.34)   Depth: 20   00:28:27  136042kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.b4 Nd7 27.Bb3 Ndf6 28.Nc3 Nd6 29.Na4
  =  (-0.24)   Depth: 21   00:35:38  173878kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.Rc1 Ke7 27.Kf2 Nf6 28.Nb4 Kd6 29.Ke3
  =  (-0.25)   Depth: 22   01:03:13  313712kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.Rc1 Ke7 27.Kf2 Nf6 28.Nb4 Kd6 29.Ke3
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 23   01:39:23  504307kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.Rc1 h4 27.Kf2 Nd6 28.b4 Nd7 29.Be2
  ³  (-0.34)   Depth: 24   03:18:26  1067373kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+ Nxc5 24.Ra2 Rxa2 25.Nxa2 Ne8 26.Rc1 Nd7
  ³  (-0.27)   Depth: 25   05:31:16  1819072kN
22...Bc5 23.Bxc5+
  ³  (-0.30)   Depth: 26   18:01:08  2070127kN

(, MyTown 04.05.2006)

Uri Blass - Askell
3r2k1/p2r2bp/1p1Bq1p1/4P3/P7/3R3P/3Q2P1/3R2K1 w - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.1 32-bit:

36.Rd4
  ²  (0.32)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
36.Rd4
  ²  (0.33)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
36.Rd4 Rf7
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.Qe3
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5
  =  (0.16)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  7kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5 38.Rc1
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  11kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5 38.a6 Rf5
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  22kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5 38.a6 Rf5 39.Rc1
  =  (0.20)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  44kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5 38.a6 Rf5 39.Qe3 Bf8
  =  (0.20)   Depth: 10   00:00:02  86kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 b5 38.a6 Rf5 39.Qe3 Bf8 40.Bxf8
  =  (0.20)   Depth: 11   00:00:03  168kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Rc1 Ra8 39.g4 Rf7 40.Kg2 Re8
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 12   00:00:10  480kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Rc1 Ra8 39.axb6 axb6 40.Re4 b5 41.Qe2 b4
  =  (0.14)   Depth: 13   00:00:18  890kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.axb6 axb6 39.Qb4 Rc8 40.Re4 Bxe5 41.g4 Bxd6 42.Rxe6
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 14   00:00:52  2762kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Rd5 h5 39.a6 Rc8 40.Qd3 Rd8 41.Qe4 Rc8 42.Qe2 Rd8
  =  (0.19)   Depth: 15   00:01:42  5538kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Rd5 h5 39.a6 Rc8 40.Qe2 Bf6 41.Qd3 Bh8 42.Qe3 Bf6
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 16   00:02:29  8275kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Rd5 h5 39.a6 Rc8 40.Qe2 Bf6 41.Qd3 Bg7 42.Qe4 Rg5
  =  (0.21)   Depth: 17   00:11:16  38842kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Re1 h5 39.axb6 axb6 40.Qe3 Rc8 41.Qe4 Rg5 42.Kh1 b5
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 18   00:17:06  56753kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Re1 h5 39.axb6 axb6 40.Qe3 Rc8 41.Qe4 Rg5 42.Kh1 b5
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 19   00:26:09  87260kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5 Rf5 38.Re1 h5 39.axb6 axb6
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 20   00:40:39  135793kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 21   01:47:27  358552kN
36.Rd4 Rf7 37.a5
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 22   03:49:04  758377kN
36.Re1 Bf8
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 22   18:13:43  3808698kN

(, MyTown 18.04.2006)

Uri Blass - Alberto GonzalezUri Blass - Alberto Gonzalez
2bq1rk1/1r1nbppp/2p1p3/8/2BPN3/6QP/3B1PP1/R2R2K1 b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.1 32-bit:

24...Nf6
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
24...Nf6
  ²  (0.26)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
24...Nf6 25.Bh6
  ²  (0.26)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
24...Nf6 25.Qd3 Nxe4
  =  (0.22)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  6kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4
  =  (0.10)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  19kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Rac1
  =  (0.12)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  61kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Qxh5 gxh6
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  76kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Qxh5 gxh6 28.Qe2
  =  (0.17)   Depth: 10   00:00:02  106kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qe5 Rb4 27.Qxh5 gxh6 28.Qe2 Bb7
  =  (0.15)   Depth: 11   00:00:04  182kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qe5 Rb4 27.Qxh5 gxh6 28.Qe2 Bb7 29.Ra3
  =  (0.14)   Depth: 12   00:00:09  397kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qe5 Rb4 27.Qxh5 gxh6 28.Qe2 Bb7 29.Ra3 Bh4
  =  (0.14)   Depth: 13   00:00:14  699kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Rac1 f5 28.Qxh5 fxe4 29.Qg4 Rf7 30.Bd2
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 14   00:00:26  1295kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Rac1 f5 28.Qxh5 fxe4 29.Qg4 Rf7 30.Bd2 Rb2
  =  (0.23)   Depth: 15   00:00:49  2565kN
24...Nf6 25.Bh6 Nh5 26.Qg4 Rb4 27.Rac1 f5 28.Qxh5 fxe4 29.Qg4 Rf7 30.Bd2 e3 31.Bxe3
  ²  (0.29)   Depth: 16   00:02:10  6825kN
24...Bh4 25.Qc3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Re7 27.Bd3 Nd5 28.Qc2 f5 29.Ra8 Qd6 30.Rb1 Bf6 31.Qc4
  =  (0.22)   Depth: 16   00:05:20  16931kN
24...Bh4 25.Qc3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Re7 27.Bd3 Nd5 28.Qc2 f5 29.Ra8 Qd6 30.Rb1 Bf6 31.Qc4
  =  (0.20)   Depth: 17   00:06:23  20647kN
24...Bh4 25.Qd3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Nxc4 27.Nxb7 Qd5 28.Rab1 e5 29.Rb4 Nxd2 30.Qxd2 Be7 31.Rb6
  =  (0.22)   Depth: 18   00:18:07  60236kN
24...Bh4 25.Qd3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Nxc4 27.Nxb7 Qd5 28.Rab1 e5 29.Rb4 Nxd2 30.Qxd2 Be7 31.Rb6
  ²  (0.26)   Depth: 19   00:37:55  130879kN
24...Bh4 25.Qd3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Nxc4 27.Nxb7 Qd5 28.Rab1 e5 29.Rb4 Nxd2 30.Qxd2 e4 31.Nc5
  =  (0.18)   Depth: 20   00:51:46  180581kN
24...Bh4 25.Qd3 Nb6
  =  (0.25)   Depth: 21   01:15:13  263109kN
24...Bh4 25.Qd3 Nb6 26.Nc5 Nxc4 27.Nxb7 Qd5 28.Rab1
  =  (0.25)   Depth: 22   02:14:08  474412kN

Milan Mraz - Uri Blass
5rk1/p1q3p1/1p2P3/2b3p1/P4r2/2P2P1B/3RRP2/1Q5K b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 1.1 32-bit:

29...Rxf3
  ³  (-0.61)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
29...Rxf3
  ³  (-0.68)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2
  µ  (-0.77)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 R3f4
  ³  (-0.58)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4 Rxc3 31.f3
  ³  (-0.52)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  10kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4 Rxc3 31.f3 Be3
  ³  (-0.63)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  20kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 R3f4 31.Qb3 Rh4+ 32.Kg1 Kh8
  ³  (-0.65)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  40kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 R3f4 31.Qb3 Rh4+ 32.Kg1 Kh7 33.Rd7
  ³  (-0.54)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  64kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 R3f4 31.Qb3 Rh4+ 32.Kg1 Kh8 33.Kf1 Rh2
  =  (-0.20)   Depth: 10   00:00:04  163kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 R3f4 31.Qb3 Rh4+ 32.Kg1 Kh8 33.Kf1 Rh2 34.Rd3
  =  (-0.21)   Depth: 11   00:00:09  331kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 Rxc3 31.Qe1 Be7 32.Rd7 Qc5 33.Kg1 Rc1 34.Rd1
  ³  (-0.43)   Depth: 12   00:00:25  937kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 Rxc3 31.Qe1 Be7 32.Rd7 Qc5 33.Qd2 Rc1+ 34.Kh2 Rc4 35.Qe3
  ³  (-0.32)   Depth: 13   00:00:46  1759kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 Rxc3 31.Qe1 Be7 32.Rd7 Qc5 33.Qd2 Rc4 34.Rxa7 g4 35.Be4
  ³  (-0.30)   Depth: 14   00:01:29  3522kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 Rxc3 31.Qe1 Be7 32.Rd7 Qc5 33.Qd2 Rc4 34.Rxa7 g4 35.Ra8 Rd4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 15   00:02:33  6401kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg2 Rxc3 31.Qe1 Be7 32.Rd7 Qc5 33.Qd2 Rc4 34.Rxa7 g4 35.Ra8 Rd4 36.Rxf8+
  ³  (-0.26)   Depth: 16   00:06:19  16759kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4 Rxf2 31.Rxf2 Rxf2 32.Rxf2 Bxf2 33.Qf5 Bc5 34.Qd5 Qd6 35.Qxg5 Qc6+ 36.Kh2
  ³  (-0.30)   Depth: 17   00:13:11  37344kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4 Rxf2 31.Rxf2 Rxf2 32.Rxf2
  ³  (-0.30)   Depth: 18   00:25:07  72304kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4 Rxf2
  ³  (-0.32)   Depth: 19   00:57:23  170021kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4
  ³  (-0.32)   Depth: 20   03:24:30  621702kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 21   11:39:55  2275033kN
29...Rxf3 30.Bg4
  =  (-0.22)   Depth: 22   31:52:20  2037458kN

(, MyTown 20.03.2006)
Parent - - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-04 05:06
Hi,

'Correspondence games in the high level are computer games with some human help and not the opposite.'
That is your opinion  - only.:-)  It might be that they are human games aided by computer analysis. :-).

'It is not proven that the better player with the program will have better chances.
It may be the opposite.'
If you follow that logic the CC champion has to be from the weakest players but it is not.:-)

'Humans are playing better with more time but the same is for computers.'
That is to discuss concerning computer while comp is going to the 22 ply depth it is enough. The further calculations have no meaning, usually.

You have iccf rating 2600...  I think that it is rating of you and computer not yours. I was playing CC and finished in 1985-9 with about 2400 but it was pre computer times. I am wondering how it would look if I would returned to the CC play.  That what I am reading from you looks not pleasent. Will I have to follow programm advises, where is here the pleasure ?

Regards
Hetman
Parent - - By Lee Ma Hong (**) Date 2007-08-04 14:26
You don't have to follow what the program advises. You can do your own analysis first, then compare your analysis with what the program recommends.
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-08-05 08:54
It seems optimistic ... the programm verifies my analysis and ... ?
Even if i will subtract from its elo 400 points as could be reasonable for the cc play its rating is still higher then mine ;-).

Rgds
Hetman
Parent - By Lee Ma Hong (**) Date 2007-08-04 14:33
Here's what the latest IECG World Champion, Andreas Strangmueller,  has to say about the use of computers:

http://f23.parsimony.net/forum50826/messages/164504.htm

note that his current IECG rating is only 2390

http://www.iecg.org/estrating.htm
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Human + machine

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill