Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Rybka in Paderborn
1 2 3 4 5 Previous Next  
Parent - - By Venator (Silver) Date 2007-12-28 10:38
Thanks Uri. In round 3 we made up for the somewhat too fast draw against Hiarcs.

In any case, any speculation about the game outcome is now useless, as the result stands :-).
And I was happy to go to my hotel room right after the game.
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) Date 2007-12-30 12:47
If a human played on as long as we did vs Hiarcs, he'd be praised for his stubborness and tenacity (or mocked for his hardheadedness) :)

Vas
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2007-12-29 07:35
Hi Uri, I thought the Rybka team 'offered' the draw; not accepted a 'draw offer' from the Hiarcs team.
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-29 08:30
You are right but the point is the same and I understood it.

Note that I said accepted a draw and not accepted a draw offer and I thought that you can say also that the side who offered a draw accepted a draw but maybe my translation from hebrew to english is wrong.
Uri
Parent - - By Razor (****) Date 2007-12-27 20:21
I agree Alan, one must weigh the risks as you see them, and all I am saying is that the Rybka team did that to the best of their ability.  To shoot down their decision to offer a draw when the position looks equal and the road ahead a long and arduous one seems a little harsh to me!  :o)
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-27 20:41
I don't blame the Rybka or the Hiarcs team for agreeing to the draw. They did this either for the high minded reasons that I put forward, or the less high minded reason that Harvey put forward. This is really a rules issue; I.e. should it be allowed for the teams to adjudicate a game that is not resolved?

Regards,
Alan
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-12-28 16:50
Nice to read that.

I was having the impression before that we are discussing the fight for the life not the game of the tournament. :-)

Rgds
Hetman
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-27 19:52
The Rybka team probably weighed the better chance of winning the drawn endgame against the possibility that Rybka would do something really bizarre and stupid to avoid the 50-move limit. Both teams were probably happy to leave with 1-1/2 points on day 1 and take their chances on the remainder of the tournament. I completely agree with you that these games should be played out when the outcome is not 100% certain.

Regards,
Alan
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-27 22:05
I think that rybka had better chances because rybka is the better engine and was more realistic in the evaluation of the position.

When rybka lost drawn position against zappa the score of zappa was more realistic(closer to draw)

Rybka's score was exactly 0.00 when hiarcs showed a small advantage based on the pgn in the hiarcs forum so rybka seemed to understand the position better than hiarcs.

Uri
Parent - - By Harvey Williamson (*****) Date 2007-12-27 22:07
How do you know Rybka is better than our latest version?
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-27 22:22
I do not know and it is only a guess.
commercial version of rybka is better than commercial version of hiarcs.
Probably both rybka and hiarcs improved but in most cases the better program remains the same program in the next version.

Uri
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-12-28 16:51
It might be that the Hiarcs engine could be better in the endgame ;-)
Rgds
Hetman
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-27 22:14 Edited 2007-12-27 22:22
ok, thanks.
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-27 22:20 Edited 2007-12-27 22:25
Alan,
It seems that you confused between depth and score

eval 0,28 mean evaluation=0 and depth=28

Edit:I see that you edited your post and I guess that you understood it.
Uri
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-27 22:24 Edited 2007-12-27 22:38
Thanks. I get Village-Idiot of the Day honors for this!

Alan
Parent - By Nelson Hernandez (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 17:15
Nah Alan, you're a flag-waving AMERICAN and as such you don't use freakin' commas the way "they" do.  [Bombastic John Philip Sousa music.]  We all ought to use a universal convention.  Decimal points and slashes, like this:

0.00/28
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2007-12-27 23:59
I ran a 10 + '10 game between Rybka and Hiarcs from the final position and Rybka couldn't win:

[FEN "8/p7/1p2nb2/2pBkpp1/2P5/2P2KPP/P7/2B5 b - - 0 1"]
[TimeControl "600+10"]

{ERT 1.0.0.3 Autoflag=On Pondering=Off}
5. Bd8 {-0.28/17 52} 6. Bd2 {0.05/18 32} Be7 {-0.27/18 34}
7. Ke2 {0.05/17 54} Bf6 {-0.28/17 22} 8. Be1 {0.05/16 10} g4 {-0.29/16 26} 9. hxg4
{0.04/18 12} fxg4 {-0.25/19 25} 10. Bb7 {0.04/20 29} Bg5 {-0.24/18 25} 11. Bc8 {0.04/21 20}
Kf5 {-0.23/20 24} 12. Bf2 {0.04/22 22} Bf6 {-0.23/20 18} 13. Kd3 {0.04/22 10} Be5
{-0.23/19 24} 14. Be1 {0.04/21 9} Bd6 {0.00/19 23} 15. Bd7 {0.04/23 24} Bb8 {0.00/19 23}
16. Bf2 {0.04/23 20} Be5 {-0.03/20 23} 17. a3 {0.04/22 9} Bf6 {-0.23/19 15} 18. Kd2
{0.04/23 35} Bg7 {-0.23/20 22} 19. Bc8 {0.04/23 25} Ke5 {-0.23/19 21} 20. Ke3 {0.04/23 27}
Bh6+ {-0.23/18 21} 21. Kd3 {0.04/23 21} Bf8 {-0.16/18 21} 22. Be3 {0.04/23 19} Bg7
{-0.17/19 31} 23. Bd7 {0.04/22 19} Bf6 {-0.17/18 19} 24. Bd2 {0.04/21 5} Kd6 {-0.17/19 19}
25. Bc8 {0.04/22 16} Bg5 {-0.16/18 19} 26. Be3 {0.04/23 17} Bf6 {0.00/18 11} 27. Bf2
{0.04/22 10} Ke5 {-0.14/17 26} 28. Bg1 {0.04/22 83} Bg7 {-0.17/19 18} 29. Be3 {0.04/22 9} Bf8
{-0.16/18 14} 30. Bf2 {0.04/22 35} Bd6 {-0.16/19 16} 31. Be1 {0.04/21 16} Kf5 {0.00/19 27}
32. Bd7 {0.04/21 6} Bc7 {0.00/19 17} 33. Bf2 {0.04/23 14} Ke5 {0.00/19 19} 34. Ke2 {0.04/20 4}
Bd8 {-0.15/18 10} 35. Ke3 {0.04/21 13} Be7 {-0.11/19 19} 36. Bc8 {0.03/21 16} Bd6 {0.00/19 21}
37. Ke2 {0.04/22 16} Kf5 {0.00/19 14} 38. Be1 {0.04/22 17} Kf6 {0.00/19 12} 39. Ke3
{0.04/21 16} Bc7 {0.00/19 16} 40. Bf2 {0.04/22 35} Ke5 {0.00/18 15} 41. Kd2 {0.03/21 14} Ng5
{0.00/18 14} 42. Kd3 {0.04/20 5} Ne6 {0.00/19 11} 43. Be1 {0.04/20 4} Bd6 {0.00/20 15} 44. Bd7
{0.03/21 24} Be7 {0.00/20 15} 45. Kc2 {0.03/21 25} Bg5 {0.00/20 15} 46. Bf2 {0.03/21 4} Kd6
{0.00/19 15} 47. Bc8 {0.03/21 6} Ke5 {0.00/19 14} 48. Be1 {0.02/21 20} Be3 {0.00/19 13}
49. Kd3 {0.02/22 13} Bg5 {0.00/20 11} 50. Ke2 {0.01/22 20} Bh6 {0.00/19 12} 51. Bf2
{0.02/22 13} Kd6 {0.00/18 12} 52. Kd3 {0.02/20 11} Bg5 {0.00/17 8} 53. Bg1 {0.02/20 10} a5
{0.00/18 14} 54. Be3 {0.17/19 17} Bf6 {0.00/17 14} 55. a4 {0.16/20 10} Be5 {0.00/19 14}
56. Ke4 {0.22/18 10} Bxg3 {-0.13/17 13} 57. Kf5 {0.16/19 4} Nd8 {-0.02/18 15} 58. Kxg4
{0.24/18 5} Be5 {0.00/18 13} 59. Bd2 {0.24/18 7} Nc6 {0.00/18 13} 60. Bb7 {0.24/19 5} Kc7
{0.00/18 13} 61. Ba6 {0.24/20 7} Kd6 {0.00/18 13} 62. Kg5 {0.24/20 17} Ne7 {0.00/18 13}
63. Bb7 {0.24/21 7} Kc7 {0.00/18 8} 64. Bg2 {0.24/20 15} Bg7 {0.00/17 8} 65. Bh3 {0.24/20 11}
Nc8 {0.00/18 13} 66. Be6 {0.24/21 10} Nd6 {0.00/19 13} 67. Bd5 {0.25/22 13} Be5 {0.04/19 14}
68. Be1 {0.24/22 13} Ne8 {0.00/18 12} 69. Kf5 {0.25/19 3} Kd6 {0.00/20 12} 70. Bf3
{0.24/21 11} Nf6 {0.00/19 12} 71. Bd2 {0.24/22 14} Nd7 {0.00/21 10} 72. Bh5 {0.24/21 16} Bg3
{0.00/19 12} 73. Bg4 {0.24/22 11} Ne5 {0.00/19 10} 74. Be2 {0.24/20 5} Kd7 {0.00/18 8} 75. Be3
{0.24/21 12} Nf7 {0.00/17 8} 76. Ke4 {0.24/19 5} Kd6 {0.00/18 12} 77. Bc1 {0.23/21 9} Ne5
{0.00/18 11} 78. Bd2 {0.23/21 6} Kc6 {0.00/19 9} 79. Bf1 {0.23/19 16} Kd6 {0.00/19 12} 80. Kf5
{0.19/20 5} Nf3 {0.00/18 11} 81. Bh6 {0.24/21 14} Ne5 {0.00/17 12} 82. Be2 {0.13/20 31} Kd7
{0.00/18 10} 83. Kf6 {0.13/20 17} Bh2 {0.00/19 12} 84. Bd2 {0.13/21 14} Kd6 {0.00/20 10}
85. Be1 {0.24/22 10} Nd7+ {0.00/18 10} 86. Kf5 {0.24/23 7} Be5 {0.00/20 11} 87. Bh5
{0.24/23 9} Nf6 {0.00/19 12} 88. Bf3 {0.24/22 4} Nd7 {0.00/20 12} 89. Be2 {0.24/21 25} Bf6
{0.00/20 10} 90. Bd1 {0.24/21 9} Be5 {0.00/21 12} 91. Bc2 {0.23/22 22} Bh2 {0.00/20 12}
92. Bd3 {0.23/21 3} Be5 {0.00/20 9} 93. Ke4 {0.23/21 10} Nf6+ {0.00/17 11} 94. Kf3 {0.23/21 5}
Ke6 {0.00/18 11} 95. Bf1 {0.23/20 3} Kd6 {0.00/16 11} 96. Bg2 {0.23/20 11} Bh2 {0.07/17 15}
97. Bh3 {0.23/20 4} Nd7 {0.00/18 11} 98. Bf1 {0.21/21 15} Ne5+ {0.00/18 11} 99. Ke4
{0.21/21 28} Nd7 {0.00/18 8} 100. Kf5 {0.18/21 17} Ne5 {0.00/20 11} 101. Bh4 {0.01/21 27} Nf7
{0.00/19 11} 102. Bd3 {0.00/20 11} Be5 {0.00/18 10} 103. Be1 {0.00/21 9} Nh6+ {0.00/18 11}
104. Ke4 {0.00/23 9} Ng8 {0.00/20 7} 105. Kf3 {0.00/22 7} Ne7 {0.00/21 8} 106. Be4
{0.00/24 12} Nc6 {0.00/22 8} 107. Ke2 {0.00/27 7} Bf4 {0.00/23 11} 108. Bf2 {0.00/39 8} Nb4
{0.00/0 0} {Draw, 50 moves rule.} 1/2-1/2
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 00:06
Good to hear. The draw result for the clearly drawn game was certainly by far the most likely outcome, but in a computer tournament why not make it a sure thing?

Alan
Parent - By Uly (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 00:14
I agree, it's almost like I play 1. e4 and say "Hey, since the most likely outcome of chess is a draw, then we're probably going to shuffle some pieces, trade others and draw in the end, so drawing already saves time. That's why I offer a draw." That's no sense.
Parent - - By Felix Kling (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 00:14
As mentioned before, there was the girl at the bar :)
Jeroen asked the audience when doing the transmission which is more important, computer chess or women and we came to an unanimous conclusion :-)
Parent - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 00:22
This is actually one of the few valid justifications for ending the game early. One can only hope that Jeroen shows up for today's games! :-)

Alan
Parent - By Fulcrum2000 (****) Date 2007-12-28 00:25
Ok, but then we expect some photographic evidence :)
Parent - - By Venator (Silver) Date 2007-12-28 08:20
No, actually Hans and I are both feeling ill..... The girl was nice, but we were not in the mood for anything else
than going to bed as quickly as possible. Believe it or not, at 19:00 I was already in it :-). Then I could not sleep,
turned on the TV, saw some darts (Taylor-Tabbern) and this took until 23:30, so it was a lousy night again....

Still, we both feel better now, so let's rock and have some nice chess today!

Jeroen
Parent - - By Venator (Silver) Date 2007-12-28 10:35
Round 3 saw a quick win against Jonny, that went wrong in taking a poisoned exchange with 9.Nxb5?
Rybka was in book until 12.... Bd7. Here is the game with Rybka evals:

[Event "IPCCC Paderborn"]
[Site "Apeldoorn"]
[Date "2007.12.28"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Jonny"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "D43"]
[PlyCount "70"]
[TimeControl "6300"]

{1MB, PaderbornB.ctg, Intel Core Duo T2300} 1. d4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} d5 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} 2. Nf3 {[%emt 0:00:07]} Nf6 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 3. c4 {
[%emt 0:00:08]} c6 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 4. Nc3 {[%emt 0:00:12]} e6 {[%emt 0:00:00]}
5. Bg5 {[%emt 0:00:07]} h6 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 6. Bxf6 {[%emt 0:00:09]} Qxf6 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} 7. Qc2 {[%emt 0:00:09]} dxc4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 8. e3 {
[%emt 0:02:30]} b5 {[%emt 0:00:00]} 9. Nxb5 {[%emt 0:01:56]} cxb5 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} 10. Qe4 {[%emt 0:03:03]} Bb4+ {[%emt 0:00:00]} 11. Kd1 {
[%emt 0:02:39]} O-O {[%emt 0:00:00]} 12. Qxa8 {[%emt 0:01:30]} Bd7 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} 13. Qxa7 {[%emt 0:01:21]} Bc6 {[%eval -104,18] [%emt 0:00:27]}
14. Be2 {(Ke2) [%emt 0:01:19]} Bxf3 {[%eval -158,19] [%emt 0:00:37]} 15. Bxf3 {
[%emt 0:08:27]} Qf5 {[%eval -177,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} 16. Kc1 {
(e4) [%emt 0:13:24]} c3 {[%eval -188,22] [%emt 0:00:12]} 17. Rd1 {
[%emt 0:02:54]} Rc8 {[%eval -198,23] [%emt 0:03:51]} 18. e4 {[%emt 0:01:51]}
Qf4+ {[%eval -268,22] [%emt 0:00:01]} 19. Kc2 {[%emt 0:02:09]} cxb2+ {
[%eval -273,22] [%emt 0:00:01]} 20. Kxb2 {[%emt 0:03:14]} Bc3+ {
[%eval -273,23] [%emt 0:00:01]} 21. Kb1 {[%emt 0:10:52]} Nc6 {
[%eval -276,25] [%emt 0:00:01]} 22. Qc5 {[%emt 0:04:30]} b4 {
[%eval -282,25] [%emt 0:00:01]} 23. a4 {[%emt 0:04:09]} bxa3 {
[%eval -284,25] [%emt 0:00:01]} 24. Qxc3 {[%emt 0:01:24]} Qb8+ {
[%eval -284,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} 25. Kc1 {[%emt 0:00:55]} Nxd4 {
[%eval -284,24] [%emt 0:00:00]} 26. Rxa3 {[%emt 0:01:12]} Nb5 {
[%eval -284,24] [%emt 0:00:00]} 27. Qxc8+ {[%emt 0:03:54]} Qxc8+ {
[%eval -290,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} 28. Kb2 {[%emt 0:01:04]} Nxa3 {
[%eval -295,25] [%emt 0:00:01]} 29. Kxa3 {[%emt 0:04:13]} Qc5+ {
[%eval -295,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} 30. Kb3 {[%emt 0:03:47]} Qxf2 {
[%eval -295,24] [%emt 0:04:45]} 31. Kc4 {(h3) [%emt 0:00:08]} g5 {
[%eval -413,19] [%emt 0:00:34]} 32. h3 {[%emt 0:00:56]} h5 {
[%eval -413,21] [%emt 0:00:00]} 33. Rd8+ {(Rd3) [%emt 0:01:07]} Kg7 {
[%eval -416,20] [%emt 0:01:53]} 34. Rd3 {[%emt 0:01:24]} Qg3 {
[%eval -456,21] [%emt 0:00:01]} 35. e5 {(Bxh5) [%emt 0:02:47]} Qxe5 {
[%eval -457,18] [%emt 0:00:45]} 0-1
Parent - - By boo! (**) Date 2007-12-28 13:26
Rybka - Shredder is turning out to be very exciting. Looking at Shredder's evals after 22.h6 and 23.Nc1, it has little clue about Rybkas plans. Seems like Rybka is somehow consolidating it's advantage.
Parent - - By BB (****) Date 2007-12-28 14:19
Think Shredder's best chances have passed (maybe Ng3-e4 rather than d4 and Ne3). I don't think the R vs NPP imbalance will be enough in the endgame.
Parent - - By boo! (**) Date 2007-12-28 14:28
It seems like Rybka at some point thought she could get the queen side passers for free. Well, she couldn't.
Parent - - By BB (****) Date 2007-12-28 15:46
It seems like Rybka at some point thought she could get the queen side passers for free. Well, she couldn't.

Yes, but they will win in the end in any case. :)
Parent - - By M ANSARI (*****) Date 2007-12-28 16:09
Very nice win for Rybka in a very very difficult game to evaluate.  Somehow I think Shredder went wrong by allowing Rybka to exchange pieces.  But I was a little worried that in this position Rybka was contemplating taking with the Knight for a while.  Leaving the Queens onboard would have made the ending with some drawing chances, while a Queen take with check is almost the equivalent of mate.

2r4k/3N1p1p/4q1pP/4b1P1/P3QP2/1P6/K7/8 w - - 0 71


I was on my dual core 2Ghz laptop but even at ply 21 Rybka was thinking about Nxe5 with almost equal score between that move and the immediately winning Qxe5+!  I wonder what the difference in evaluation was on an 8 core and how close Rybka was to playing Nxe5.
Parent - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-28 17:15
Qxe5 is easy for commercial rybka
She only needs less than 3 minutes on my slow hardware(A3000 2.01 ghz) that is probably about 10 times slower than the hardware that was used in the tournament(I used only 1 processor and 32 bits)

less than 3 minutes can be easily translated to less than 18 seconds on fast hardware.

Rybka - Shredder, IPCCC Paderborn 2007
2r4k/3N1p1p/4q1pP/4b1P1/P3QP2/1P6/K7/8 w - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 2.3.2a 32-bit :

71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8
  ±  (1.01)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.a4-a5
  ±  (0.93)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  3kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.a4-a5 Rc8-c5
  ±  (0.94)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  5kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.a4-a5 Rc8-d8 73.Ka2-a3
  ±  (1.05)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  13kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.a4-a5 Rc8-d8 73.Ka2-a3 Qe6-d5
  ±  (1.11)   Depth: 9   00:00:00  23kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.a4-a5 Rc8-d8 73.Ka2-a3 Qe6-d5 74.Qe4xd5
  ±  (1.11)   Depth: 10   00:00:00  41kN
71.Nd7xe5 Rc8-d8 72.Ka2-a3 Kh8-g8 73.a4-a5 Qe6-d6+ 74.Ka3-a4 Qd6-e6 75.b3-b4
  ±  (1.18)   Depth: 11   00:00:02  128kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.Qe4-d4 Kg8-f8 73.Ne5-d7+ Kf8-e7 74.Nd7-f6 Qe6-f5 75.Qd4-b4+ Ke7-e6 76.Qb4-b6+ Ke6-e7
  +-  (1.53)   Depth: 12   00:00:04  293kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2-c5+ 74.Qd5xc5 Rc8xc5 75.b3-b4 Rc5-c3+ 76.Ka3-b2 Rc3-c8 77.a4-a5 Kh8-g8
  +-  (1.57)   Depth: 13   00:00:05  369kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.Qe4-d4 Kg8-f8 73.Ne5-d7+ Kf8-e7 74.Nd7-f6 Qe6-f5 75.Qd4-e3+ Ke7-d6 76.Nf6xh7 Qf5-e6 77.Qe3-b6+ Kd6-e7
  +-  (1.63)   Depth: 14   00:00:07  471kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.Qe4-d4 Kg8-f8 73.Ne5-d7+ Kf8-e7 74.Nd7-f6 Qe6-f5 75.Qd4-e3+ Ke7-d6 76.Nf6xh7 Qf5-e6 77.Qe3-b6+ Kd6-e7
  +-  (1.63)   Depth: 15   00:00:09  564kN
71.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 72.Qe4-d4 Kg8-f8 73.Ne5-d7+ Kf8-e7 74.Nd7-f6 Qe6-d6 75.Qd4-e3+ Qd6-e6 76.Qe3-a7+ Ke7-d8 77.Qa7-d4+ Kd8-e7
  +-  (1.66)   Depth: 16   00:00:15  918kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2xf4 74.Ne5xf7+ Kh8-g8 75.Nf7-d6+ Kg8-h8 76.a4-a5 Rc8-b8 77.Nd6-f7+ Kh8-g8
  +-  (1.49)   Depth: 17   00:00:26  1575kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2xf4 74.Ne5xf7+ Kh8-g8 75.Nf7-d6+ Kg8-h8 76.a4-a5 Rc8-b8 77.Nd6-f7+ Kh8-g8
  +-  (1.50)   Depth: 18   00:00:32  1969kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2xf4 74.Ne5xf7+ Kh8-g8 75.Nf7-d6+ Kg8-h8 76.a4-a5 Rc8-b8 77.Nd6-f7+ Kh8-g8
  +-  (1.43)   Depth: 19   00:00:45  2803kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2xf4 74.Ne5xf7+ Kh8-g8 75.Nf7-d6+ Kg8-h8 76.a4-a5 Rc8-b8 77.Nd6-f7+ Kh8-g8
  +-  (1.41)   Depth: 20   00:01:08  4444kN
71.Nd7xe5 Qe6-b6 72.Qe4-d5 Qb6-f2+ 73.Ka2-a3 Qf2xf4 74.Ne5xf7+ Kh8-g8 75.Nf7-d6+ Kg8-h8 76.a4-a5 Qf4-c1+ 77.Ka3-a4 Rc8-c4+
  ±  (1.24)   Depth: 21   00:02:03  8427kN
71.Qe4xe5+ Qe6xe5 72.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 73.b3-b4 Kg8-f8 74.b4-b5 Kf8-e7 75.b5-b6 Ke7-d6 76.a4-a5 Rc8-c5 77.Ka2-b3 Rc5-b5+
  +-  (2.34)   Depth: 21   00:02:48  11106kN
71.Qe4xe5+ Qe6xe5 72.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 73.b3-b4 Kg8-f8 74.b4-b5 Kf8-e7 75.b5-b6 Ke7-d6 76.a4-a5 Rc8-c5 77.Ka2-b3 Rc5-b5+
  +-  (2.34)   Depth: 22   00:02:54  11457kN
71.Qe4xe5+ Qe6xe5 72.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 73.b3-b4 Kg8-f8 74.b4-b5 Kf8-e7 75.b5-b6 Ke7-d6 76.a4-a5 Rc8-c5 77.Ka2-b3 Rc5-b5+
  +-  (2.55)   Depth: 23   00:03:20  12850kN
71.Qe4xe5+ Qe6xe5 72.Nd7xe5 Kh8-g8 73.b3-b4 Kg8-f8 74.b4-b5 Kf8-e7 75.b5-b6 Ke7-d6 76.a4-a5 Rc8-c5 77.Ka2-b3 Rc5-b5+
  +-  (2.55)   Depth: 24   00:03:39  14126kN

(,  28.12.2007)
Parent - By Venator (Silver) Date 2007-12-29 08:21
Hi Majd,

Rybka in Paderborn never considered Nxe5, it was Qxe5+ immediately with a score around +2,5.

Regards, Jeroen
Parent - - By Roland Rösler (****) Date 2007-12-29 01:27
I´m not convinced. But what is the end? Let us have a look to this position:
3r1bk1/2q2p1p/6pP/4N1P1/P1Q2P2/1P2N3/K7/8 b - - 0 62

Shredder played 62. ... Qb7?.
What´s about this (forced?) line:
62... Rd2+ 63. Kb1 Qxc4 64. N3xc4 Rd4 65. a5 Rxf4 66. a6 Rf1+ 67. Ka2 Rf2+ 68.
Nb2 Rc2 69. b4 Bxb4 70. Kb3 Rc8 71. Kxb4 Rb8+ 72. Kc3 Ra8 73. Nbd3 Rxa6
6k1/5p1p/r5pP/4N1P1/8/2KN4/8/8 w - - 0 73

I think, this is a draw!

PS: There is (at least) one better move for White. I don´t think, Rybka would see it in the game. Can you see it?
Parent - By BB (****) Date 2007-12-29 09:18

> What´s about this...line: 62... Rd2+ 63. Kb1 Qxc4 64. N3xc4 Rd4 65. a5 Rxf4 66. a6 Rf1+ 67. Ka2 Rf2+ 68. Nb2 Rc2 69. b4 Bxb4 70. Kb3 Rc8 71. Kxb4 Rb8+ 72. Kc3 Ra8 73. Nbd3 Rxa6


This was essentially what Zappa Mexico liked (at least the queen trade - I don't recall if the B-sac was in the PV or not).
Parent - - By Felix Kling (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 14:57
22.h6 was a mistake by rybka, throwing away the game, Nf4 followed by the thematic g6 (why does Rybka prefer closing the lines with h6??) would have won. I hope Vas and Larry will fix that strange behaviour, open lines are som important for the attack and Rybka should understand that better.
Parent - - By BB (****) Date 2007-12-28 15:11
why does Rybka prefer closing the lines with h6??

There was also a later expectation of a3 (allowing the blocking b3) from Shredder. Actually, this might be even worse, as there is no c-pawn for a chance to pry things open. Alas, Shredder seems to have rejected a draw, and now it might be Rybka who has the chances again.
Parent - By richbell (**) Date 2007-12-28 15:55
Awesome match, delight to watch Rybka crush shredder at the end. Congrats to Rybka team again.
Parent - - By Laszlo (***) Date 2007-12-28 16:39
Kasparov doesn't agree with you. According to him, a pawn on h6 or h3 sometimes has a bishop force.
Parent - By Felix Kling (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 16:42
Of course sometimes h6 is the right move, but in general g6 is more often right because it opens lines... Kasparov wouldn't say something different in this position.
Parent - By Hetman (*****) Date 2007-12-28 16:45
S. Tarrasch said the same :-) about h3(6) pawns.
Rgds
Hetman
Parent - - By M ANSARI (*****) Date 2007-12-29 11:05
Hi ... I too thought that Nf4 was much stronger.  But after analyzing a lot of lines ... it does seem that h6 was actually very strong.  It make g7 need a piece to protect it and in many variations black is almost playing a piece down.  Really hard to say ... but what a fantastic game.  One thing for sure ... is that in unbalanced positions Rybka Rules !!!  Still a great game for Shredder ... and probably this would have been a draw had Shredder not allowed pieces to be exchanged.  There is no way white could have pushed his pawns with a Queen and several heavy pieces still on.  But Shredder pushed too hard and allowed exchanges and was punished severely! 

White's position is so strong in the endgame that if the white pawns were 1 square more forward each with white to move ... white would still win even without the Knight.  That is why the more exchanges there are the stronger the connected white pawns become.

Try this position out

2r4k/5p1p/6pP/P5P1/1P3P2/8/K7/8 w - - 0 72
Parent - By BB (****) Date 2007-12-29 11:08
White's position is so strong in the endgame that if the white pawns were 1 square more forward each with white to move ... white would still win even without the Knight.

Indeed, this was one positive (longterm) effect of h6 - Black's king ended up in misery at h8, and was unable to take part in the endgame.
Parent - - By Venator (Silver) Date 2007-12-28 16:01
Round 4 was a tough one against Shredder. Rybka was better until she unleashed the highly questionable
22.h6? After that black was pressurising and with Rybka going down to -0.37 we feared the worst. But also
Shredder started to make mistakes and Rybka clearly knew that the rook exchange was favourable. A real
Shredder lemon was 66... Ba3? after which Rybka neatly outplayed black.

[Event "IPCCC Paderborn"]
[Site "Apeldoorn"]
[Date "2007.12.28"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Rybka"]
[Black "Shredder"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B66"]
[PlyCount "161"]
[TimeControl "6300"]

{1MB, PaderbornA.ctg, Intel Core Duo T2300} 1. e4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} c5 {
[%emt 0:00:10]} 2. Nf3 {[%emt 0:00:00]} d6 {[%emt 0:00:07]} 3. d4 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} cxd4 {[%emt 0:00:10]} 4. Nxd4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} Nf6 {
[%emt 0:00:07]} 5. Nc3 {[%emt 0:00:00]} Nc6 {[%emt 0:00:09]} 6. Bg5 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} e6 {[%emt 0:00:11]} 7. Qd2 {[%emt 0:00:00]} a6 {[%emt 0:00:07]}
8. O-O-O {[%emt 0:00:00]} Qb6 {[%emt 0:00:08]} 9. Nb3 {[%emt 0:00:00]} Be7 {
[%emt 0:00:09]} 10. f3 {[%emt 0:00:00]} O-O {[%emt 0:00:24]} 11. Kb1 {
[%emt 0:00:00]} Rd8 {[%emt 0:00:16]} 12. h4 {[%emt 0:00:00]} Qc7 {
[%emt 0:00:09]} 13. Qf2 {[%eval 5,21] [%emt 0:03:54]} b5 {[%emt 0:00:11]} 14.
Be3 {[%eval 23,22] [%emt 0:04:16]} Rb8 {[%emt 0:00:12]} 15. g4 {
[%eval 27,22] [%emt 0:02:00]} b4 {(Ne5) [%emt 0:04:21]} 16. Ne2 {
[%eval 22,22] [%emt 0:02:55]} d5 {(Ne5) [%emt 0:04:00]} 17. g5 {
[%eval 39,19] [%emt 0:01:09]} Ne8 {[%emt 0:03:33]} 18. exd5 {
[%eval 38,21] [%emt 0:00:00]} a5 {[%emt 0:02:17]} 19. Qe1 {
[%eval 35,21] [%emt 0:02:21]} exd5 {[%emt 0:01:59]} 20. Nbd4 {
[%eval 42,21] [%emt 0:03:05]} Bc5 {(Nxd4) [%emt 0:02:54]} 21. h5 {
[%eval 49,18] [%emt 0:01:57]} Ne7 {(a4) [%emt 0:00:24]} 22. h6 {
[%eval 67,20] [%emt 0:02:24]} g6 {[%emt 0:03:43]} 23. Nc1 {
[%eval 49,20] [%emt 0:01:46]} Bd7 {(a4) [%emt 0:03:43]} 24. Nd3 {
[%eval 55,21] [%emt 0:04:55]} Bd6 {[%emt 0:00:10]} 25. Bg2 {
[%eval 53,21] [%emt 0:02:19]} a4 {[%emt 0:04:47]} 26. f4 {
[%eval 50,21] [%emt 0:07:57]} b3 {(Qc8) [%emt 0:00:09]} 27. cxb3 {
[%eval 90,17] [%emt 0:02:22]} axb3 {[%emt 0:00:09]} 28. Nxb3 {
[%eval 85,19] [%emt 0:01:15]} Qc4 {(Bf5) [%emt 0:01:48]} 29. Qd2 {
[%eval 26,19] [%emt 0:04:32]} Ra8 {[%emt 0:02:36]} 30. Bh3 {
[%eval 18,20] [%emt 0:00:01]} Bf5 {[%emt 0:02:08]} 31. Bxf5 {
[%eval 19,21] [%emt 0:00:00]} Nxf5 {[%emt 0:01:10]} 32. Bc5 {
[%eval 22,21] [%emt 0:00:06]} Qa4 {(Ng3) [%emt 0:02:12]} 33. Nbc1 {
[%eval 0,19] [%emt 0:01:14]} d4 {[%emt 0:03:35]} 34. Rhe1 {
[%eval 0,23] [%emt 0:01:08]} Ne3 {[%emt 0:00:31]} 35. b3 {
[%eval 0,22] [%emt 0:00:42]} Qc6 {[%emt 0:00:36]} 36. Bxd4 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:00:36]} Nxd1 {[%emt 0:00:10]} 37. Rxd1 {
[%eval 0,22] [%emt 0:01:01]} Nc7 {[%emt 0:00:34]} 38. Ne2 {
[%eval 0,19] [%emt 0:00:47]} Bf8 {(Nb5) [%emt 0:03:25]} 39. Bb2 {
[%eval 0,19] [%emt 0:02:01]} Qa6 {(Ne6) [%emt 0:03:30]} 40. a4 {
[%eval 6,21] [%emt 0:02:59]} Nd5 {[%emt 0:00:54]} 41. Nd4 {
[%eval 0,22] [%emt 0:01:29]} Rac8 {[%emt 0:00:10]} 42. Qe2 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:01:10]} Nc3+ {[%emt 0:01:33]} 43. Bxc3 {
[%eval 0,22] [%emt 0:00:01]} Rxc3 {[%emt 0:01:31]} 44. Kb2 {
[%eval -22,23] [%emt 0:02:24]} Rcc8 {[%emt 0:01:07]} 45. Qe4 {
[%eval -24,22] [%emt 0:00:18]} Rc7 {(Qb6) [%emt 0:02:12]} 46. Nb4 {
[%eval 0,20] [%emt 0:00:46]} Qd6 {(Bxb4) [%emt 0:00:48]} 47. Nbc2 {
[%eval 0,18] [%emt 0:00:08]} Rdc8 {(Rcc8) [%emt 0:04:23]} 48. Rd2 {
[%eval -2,21] [%emt 0:01:47]} Rc5 {(Rc3) [%emt 0:00:24]} 49. Re2 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:00:51]} Qd7 {[%emt 0:12:03]} 50. Ne3 {
[%eval 0,25] [%emt 0:00:00]} Rb8 {(Re8) [%emt 0:01:48]} 51. Nf3 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:00:49]} Rcc8 {(f5) [%emt 0:00:39]} 52. Ne5 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:00:41]} Qd6 {[%emt 0:00:09]} 53. Nc2 {
[%eval 0,21] [%emt 0:00:31]} Rc7 {[%emt 0:00:29]} 54. Re3 {
[%eval 0,20] [%emt 0:00:17]} Qb6 {(Qc5) [%emt 0:00:58]} 55. Nc4 {
[%eval 23,19] [%emt 0:00:46]} Qa6 {[%emt 0:00:24]} 56. Ka2 {
[%eval 41,19] [%emt 0:00:07]} Rbc8 {[%emt 0:01:00]} 57. Rc3 {
[%eval 20,20] [%emt 0:00:28]} Re7 {(Qc6) [%emt 0:00:31]} 58. Qd3 {
[%eval 43,20] [%emt 0:01:52]} Qb7 {[%emt 0:01:43]} 59. Ne5 {
[%eval 49,22] [%emt 0:00:10]} Rec7 {[%emt 0:05:34]} 60. Rxc7 {
[%eval 69,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} Qxc7 {[%emt 0:02:03]} 61. Ne3 {
[%eval 69,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} Rd8 {[%emt 0:01:13]} 62. Qc4 {
[%eval 63,25] [%emt 0:04:26]} Qb7 {[%emt 0:00:26]} 63. Kb2 {
[%eval 72,24] [%emt 0:00:13]} Rc8 {[%emt 0:02:05]} 64. Qd4 {
[%eval 77,24] [%emt 0:00:00]} Bc5 {(Rb8) [%emt 0:00:54]} 65. Qd5 {
[%eval 94,21] [%emt 0:00:30]} Qe7 {(Qc7) [%emt 0:00:18]} 66. Qe4 {
[%eval 87,19] [%emt 0:00:45]} Ba3+ {(Kf8) [%emt 0:00:50]} 67. Ka2 {
[%eval 145,19] [%emt 0:00:12]} Bd6 {[%emt 0:06:46]} 68. Nd5 {
[%eval 256,25] [%emt 0:00:00]} Qe6 {[%emt 0:01:26]} 69. Nf6+ {
[%eval 284,24] [%emt 0:00:00]} Kh8 {[%emt 0:00:19]} 70. Nfd7 {
[%eval 284,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} Bxe5 {(Be7) [%emt 0:00:48]} 71. Qxe5+ {
[%eval 321,22] [%emt 0:00:17]} Qxe5 {[%emt 0:00:19]} 72. Nxe5 {
[%eval 356,24] [%emt 0:00:01]} Kg8 {[%emt 0:00:52]} 73. a5 {
[%eval 400,26] [%emt 0:00:00]} Kf8 {[%emt 0:01:46]} 74. b4 {
[%eval 400,26] [%emt 0:00:01]} Ke7 {(Ke8) [%emt 0:00:11]} 75. b5 {
[%eval 400,14] [%emt 0:00:05]} Kd6 {(Ke6) [%emt 0:05:21]} 76. b6 {
[%eval 501,19] [%emt 0:00:03]} Rc5 {(Re8) [%emt 0:00:16]} 77. Kb3 {
[%eval 501,16] [%emt 0:00:03]} Rb5+ {[%emt 0:00:13]} 78. Kc4 {
[%eval 501,18] [%emt 0:00:01]} Rxa5 {(Rb1) [%emt 0:00:50]} 79. b7 {
[%eval 591,14] [%emt 0:00:03]} Kc7 {[%emt 0:00:19]} 80. b8=Q+ {
[%eval 720,16] [%emt 0:00:00]} Kxb8 {[%emt 0:00:14]} 81. Nc6+ {
[%eval 691,17] [%emt 0:00:01]} 1-0
Parent - - By skulibj (*) Date 2007-12-28 16:28
So both engines not understanding the game too well at times?
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) Date 2007-12-28 18:58

> So both engines not understanding the game too well at times?


I think this could be said about all engines. Rybka's the best because she seems to understand more positions than all the other engines.
Parent - By Carl Bicknell (*****) Date 2007-12-28 19:04
GREAT win V Shredder.

I actually thought shredder was doing ok until a pair of rooks came off - I think black has to resist that at all costs.
Parent - By Razor (****) Date 2007-12-28 19:25
The ones that matter anyway!  :o)
Parent - - By Laszlo (***) Date 2007-12-28 16:41
Bravo the Team! The Revenge!!
Parent - - By Lee Ma Hong (**) Date 2007-12-29 02:51
Bravo the Team! The Revenge!!

What Revenge? Did I miss a recent tournament where Shredder beat Rybka?
Parent - By Roland Rösler (****) Date 2007-12-29 03:36
Not recent :-). Rybka vs. Shredder is always the same as Kramnik vs. Leko. Limbering-up exercises :-).
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) Date 2007-12-28 17:16
My rybka prefered 27.axb3 and not cxb3
I wonder if cxb3 is a better move

Rybka - Shredder, IPCCC Paderborn 2007
1r1rn1k1/2qbnp1p/3b2pP/3p2P1/p2N1P2/1p1NB3/PPP3B1/1K1RQ2R w - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 2.3.2a 32-bit :

27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Rb8-a8
  ±  (1.31)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2
  ±  (1.21)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  21kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4
  ±  (1.12)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  32kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Rb8-b5 29.Nb3-d4 Rb5-b7 30.Qe1-f2
  ±  (1.11)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  68kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Rb8-b5 29.Be3-d4 Rd8-a8 30.Qe1-f2 Ne7-f5
  ±  (1.12)   Depth: 9   00:00:01  103kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Rb8-b5 29.Be3-d4 Rd8-a8 30.Qe1-f2 Ne7-f5 31.Bd4-c5
  ±  (1.11)   Depth: 10   00:00:03  159kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Rd1-d2 Bg4-f5 31.Rh1-d1 Ne7-c6
  ±  (1.01)   Depth: 11   00:00:12  730kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Rd1-d2 Bg4-f5 31.Rh1-d1 Rb8-a8 32.Be3-b6
  ±  (0.95)   Depth: 12   00:00:21  1244kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Bg2-f3 Bg4xf3 31.Qf2xf3 Ne7-f5 32.Qf3-f2 Rb8-a8 33.Be3-b6
  ±  (0.86)   Depth: 13   00:00:36  2201kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Rd1-d2 Bg4-f5 31.Rh1-d1 Ne8-c7 32.Bg2-f1 Nc7-e6 33.Rd1-e1
  ±  (0.80)   Depth: 14   00:01:10  4330kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Rd1-d2 Bg4-f5 31.Bg2-h3 Bf5-e4 32.Rh1-d1 Ne7-f5 33.Bh3xf5 Be4xf5
  ±  (0.78)   Depth: 15   00:02:05  7971kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Rd1-d2 Bg4-f5 31.Bg2-h3 Bf5-e4 32.Rh1-d1 Ne7-f5 33.Bh3xf5 Be4xf5
  ±  (0.72)   Depth: 16   00:04:11  16273kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Nb3-a5 Qc4-c7 30.Qe1-d2 Bd7-f5 31.Na5-b3 Bf5xd3 32.Qd2xd3 Bd6xf4 33.Rh1-e1 Ne7-f5
  ²  (0.56)   Depth: 17   00:11:11  43110kN
27.a2xb3 a4xb3 28.Nd4xb3 Qc7-c4 29.Qe1-f2 Bd7-g4 30.Bg2-f3 Bg4xf3 31.Qf2xf3 Ne7-f5 32.Be3-c5 Rd8-c8 33.Rh1-e1 Bd6xc5
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 18   00:24:45  95863kN

(,  28.12.2007)
Up Topic Rybka Support & Discussion / Rybka Discussion / Rybka in Paderborn
1 2 3 4 5 Previous Next  

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill