Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
- - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-02-18 21:59 Edited 2007-03-08 11:36
CCT9 (http://www.cctchess.info/index.html) has just finished, and Rybka won with 6/7.

The full Rybka team for this tournament was:

Operator: Frank Wies
Opening Book: Jeroen Noomen
Interface between Opening book and ICC: Victor Zakharov and his staff at Convekta
Engine: Vasik Rajlich

Our hardware was a Colfax CX-935 Dual Xeon 5345 Workstation, 2.66 MHz (8 Cores), supplied by: www.colfax-intl.com

I'd like to thank:

- Peter Skinner for preparing and running the event and doing so in an efficient manner
- Frank Wies and Victor Zakharov for fighting through all sorts of trouble to allow Rybka to use Jeroen's .ctg book on ICC
- Larry Kaufman for his Rybka 2.3 LK formulation, which we used in the tournament

Rybka's play was a bit spotty this time, but the games were very interesting. Below are my quick impressions:

Rd 1, Rybka-Now 1-0: Black played a bit passively in a Maroczy structure and then, rather than continue in a cramped position, panicked into an unsound piece sacrifice.

Rd 2, Chiron-Rybka 0-1: In a French structure, white overpressed on the kingside (16. f5 is probably not correct) and ended up in a somewhat worse endgame. Black was able to round up the e5 pawn and then her central pawns decided the game.

Rd 3, Rybka-Loop 1-0: From a seemingly quiet slightly-better queenless middlegame, white found the surprising shot 20. b4! leading pretty much by force to a winning endgame. It's a bit hard to believe, but black needs to have a hard think on move 18 about how to avoid this.

Rd 4, Naum-Rybka 1/2-1/2: Due to technical problems, we played this round without any opening book. This game is not going to tempt us to repeat this. Rybka set up her pieces in a rather strange manner - .. d5, .. e6, .. g6, and .. Nc6 all seem a bit inconsistent with each other. The resulting position was passive and white had nice pressure along the c-file. He chose to cash in his positional advantage by grabbing a pawn and trying to squeeze black's position, but black always had some counterplay and the game remained safely within the bounds of a draw.

All remaining technical difficulties were finally solved before round 5, and Rybka was able to play the rest of the tournament properly with Jeroen's opening book.

Rd 5, Rybka-Junior 1/2-1/2: A wild, flawed, and extremely interesting game. White got a tremendous opening position, having a nice straightforward attack against the black king while black was left to defend his position with awkward moves such as .. Rg8, .. Qf8, .. Ra7, and .. Kh7. By move 25, black looked pretty busted. Most engines would continue trying to hold black's position together and probably end up taking a very one-sided beating. Junior instead tossed fuel on the fire:

2b5/1r1n2qk/p3pbrp/3p3R/2p3P1/P1N4Q/1PPBB2P/2K2R2 b - - 0 30


Here, black played 30. .. d4, ripping open the position and betting his remaining chances on the slight exposure of white's king. The game continued 31. Na4 (31. Nd1 and 31. Ne4 are also strong alternatives) d3 32. cxd3 Bxb2+:

2b5/1r1n2qk/p3p1rp/7R/N1p3P1/P2P3Q/1b1BB2P/2K2R2 w - - 0 33


Now, white should have several ways to put black's chances on life support, but Rybka chose the wrong way:

33. Kd1 ?? Nf6! and the position is already drawn. The reason is the deepest variation I've ever seen in an engine-engine game (freestyle play is another story): 34. dxc4 Nxh5 35. gxh5 Rf6 36. Nxb2 Rxf1+ 37. Bxf1 Qxb2 38. Qd3+ Kg8 39. Qd8+ Kg7 40. Qxc8 Qb1+ and white cannot avoid a perpetual (or at least so says Rybka). Chess can be pretty deep!

Even more amazingly, Rybka managed to finally see all of this prior to playing her 34th move. Unfortunately, it was too late - the result was a massive fail-low and the harmless 34. Bxh6, leading to an endgame with a useless extra pawn.

It was a disappointing finish to the game, but Junior deserves credit for exploiting his chances.

Rd 6, Diep-Rybka 0-1: A complex game. White started with a positional pawn sacrifice and then offered an exchange of queens. The endgame seems a bit more pleasant for black - the .. f6 pawn break is available, and white's king is a bit open. Perhaps it would be better for white to keep the queens on the board. Anyway, it's hard to pinpoint any clear mistakes in this game.

Rd 7, Rybka-Scorpio 1-0: Scorpio must have been having quite a good tournament, but this game was a disaster for them. Rybka came out of book on move 18 with a totally dominant position. Black could find nothing better than shuffling his queen around with Qe6-f6-f4-f3-f6-d8 and his position collapsed quickly.

Vas

ps. Games in .pgn are below:

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.17"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Rybka"]
[Black "NowX"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2836"]
[BlackElo "2417"]
[Opening "Sicilian: accelerated fianchetto, Gurgenidze variation"]
[ECO "A34"]
[NIC "EO.64"]
[Time "01:08:12"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. c4 c5 2. Nc3 g6 3. Nf3 Nc6 4. d4 cxd4 5. Nxd4 Nf6 6. e4 Nxd4 7. Qxd4 d6
8. f3 Bg7 9. Be3 O-O 10. Qd2 Be6 11. Be2 Qa5 12. O-O Rfc8 13. Rfc1 b6 14. b3
Bd7 15. a3 Rab8 16. Ra2 Kh8 17. g4 Qe5 18. Nb5 Rb7 19. Kg2 Kg8 20. Nd4 Rbc7
21. a4 h5 22. g5 Nxe4 23. fxe4 Qxe4+ 24. Bf3 Qh4 25. Qf2 Qh3+ 26. Kh1 Be5
27. Qf1 a6 28. Qxh3 Bxh3 29. Re1 Bd7 30. Be4 Bg7 31. Rd2 Bh3 32. Ne2 Rb8 33.
Nf4 Bf5 34. Bxf5 gxf5 35. Rf1 Kh7 36. Nd5 Rcb7 37. Rxf5 Kg8 38. Nf6+ Kf8 39.
Nxh5 Kg8 40. Nxg7 Kxg7 41. Kg2 Rh8 42. Kg3 Kg6 43. Rdf2 Rf8 44. h4 Kg7 45.
h5 a5 46. Kg4 Kg8 47. g6 f6 {Black resigns} 1-0

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.17"]
[Round "-"]
[White "ChironX"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2537"]
[BlackElo "2836"]
[Opening "French: classical, Steinitz variation"]
[ECO "C14"]
[NIC "FR.06"]
[Time "03:03:10"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. e4 e6 2. d4 d5 3. Nc3 Nf6 4. Bg5 Be7 5. e5 Nfd7 6. Bxe7 Qxe7 7. f4 a6 8.
Nf3 c5 9. Qd2 Nc6 10. dxc5 Nxc5 11. Qe3 b5 12. a3 Qa7 13. Rd1 O-O 14. Be2
Bb7 15. O-O h6 16. f5 Nd7 17. Qxa7 Rxa7 18. Bd3 Bc8 19. Rfe1 Rc7 20. Bf1 Nb6
21. Kh1 Na5 22. fxe6 fxe6 23. Rb1 Nac4 24. Bxc4 Rxc4 25. Kg1 g5 26. Red1 Rc7
27. h3 Nc4 28. Ne2 Rg7 29. Ned4 g4 30. hxg4 Rxg4 31. Re1 Kf7 32. Re2 Bd7 33.
c3 Ke7 34. Rbe1 a5 35. Kh2 a4 36. Ng1 Be8 37. Nh3 Rfg8 38. Ng1 Bh5 39. Ngf3
Rf4 40. Kh1 Rg7 41. Nc6+ Kd7 42. Ncd4 Rg8 43. Kh2 Bxf3 44. Nxf3 Rgg4 45. Kh1
Re4 46. Kg1 Rxe2 47. Rxe2 Re4 48. Rf2 Ke7 49. g3 Nxe5 50. Nd4 Re1+ 51. Kg2
Nc4 52. Kh3 Rh1+ 53. Kg2 Rb1 54. Nxb5 Rxb2 55. Rxb2 Nxb2 56. Nd4 e5 57. Nf5+
Ke6 58. Ne3 d4 59. cxd4 exd4 60. Nf1 Nc4 61. Kf2 {White resigns} 0-1

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.17"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Rybka"]
[Black "WoDra"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2836"]
[BlackElo "2633"]
[Opening "King's Indian: accelerated Averbakh system"]
[ECO "E70"]
[NIC "KI.31"]
[Time "05:11:32"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. e4 d6 4. d4 Bg7 5. Bg5 Nbd7 6. Be2 c5 7. d5 Qb6 8.
Qb3 h6 9. Bd2 g5 10. Nf3 Qxb3 11. axb3 a6 12. h3 Nf8 13. g3 Ng6 14. Kf1 Bd7
15. Be3 O-O-O 16. Ra2 e6 17. Kg2 Rhe8 18. Nd2 Re7 19. b4 cxb4 20. Nb5 Bxb5
21. cxb5 exd5 22. bxa6 bxa6 23. Bxa6+ Kd7 24. Bb5+ Ke6 25. exd5+ Nxd5 26.
Bc4 Rc8 27. Re1 Be5 28. Bb3 Ree8 29. Ba7 Ne7 30. f4 gxf4 31. gxf4 f6 32.
fxe5 fxe5 33. Nc4 Nf4+ 34. Kh2 Nf5 35. Nb6+ Kf6 36. Nxc8 Rxc8 37. Rf1 Ne2
38. Ra4 Ng3 39. Re1 Ra8 40. Bb6 Rxa4 41. Bd8+ Kg7 42. Bxa4 Nh5 43. Rg1+ Kf7
44. Bb3+ Ke8 45. Rg8+ Kd7 46. Bd1 Nfg7 47. Bh4 Ke6 48. Bg4+ Kf7 49. Rd8 Nf4
50. Rd7+ Kg8 {Black resigns} 1-0

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.17"]
[Round "-"]
[White "NaumXMP"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by repetition"]
[WhiteElo "2744"]
[BlackElo "2836"]
[Opening "QGD: 4.Nf3"]
[ECO "D37"]
[NIC "QI.01"]
[Time "07:38:31"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nf3 d5 4. Nc3 Nc6 5. e3 g6 6. Bd3 Bg7 7. Bd2 O-O 8.
O-O Re8 9. Rc1 a6 10. a3 b6 11. b4 Bb7 12. Qc2 dxc4 13. Bxc4 Qd6 14. Bd3
Rab8 15. Rfd1 Red8 16. Ne4 Qf8 17. Bxa6 Bxa6 18. Nxf6+ Bxf6 19. Qxc6 Rd6 20.
Qe4 Qd8 21. a4 Bg7 22. Rc2 Bb7 23. Qf4 Bxf3 24. gxf3 Rb7 25. Qe4 Rd5 26. f4
Bf8 27. Ra1 Qd7 28. a5 Ra7 29. Rac1 Qb5 30. Qg2 Bxb4 31. axb6 Qxb6 32. Rb2
c5 33. Rcb1 Qc6 34. Bxb4 cxb4 35. Rxb4 Ra2 36. Rb8+ Kg7 37. h3 Qc2 38. Qf3
h5 39. Kg2 h4 40. Rf1 Qc3 41. Rb7 Rda5 42. Qe4 Qc4 43. Rb8 Qc3 44. Rfb1 Qd2
45. Qf3 Qc2 46. R8b6 Ra1 47. R6b2 Qd3 48. Rxa1 Rxa1 49. Qe2 Qc3 50. Rc2 Qb3
51. Rb2 Qc3 52. Rc2 Qb3 53. Rb2 Qc3 {Game drawn by repetition} 1/2-1/2

[Event "ICC 50 1"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.18"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Rybka"]
[Black "ban"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[ICCResult "Game drawn by mutual agreement"]
[WhiteElo "2821"]
[BlackElo "2695"]
[Opening "Sicilian: Richter-Rauzer, Rauzer attack, 7...a6"]
[ECO "B66"]
[NIC "SI.29"]
[Time "01:04:51"]
[TimeControl "3000+1"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 Nc6 6. Bg5 e6 7. Qd2 a6 8.
O-O-O h6 9. Nxc6 bxc6 10. Bf4 d5 11. Qe3 Bb4 12. Be2 O-O 13. e5 Nd7 14. Qg3
Kh8 15. Rd3 Rg8 16. Qg4 Qf8 17. a3 Be7 18. Rh3 c5 19. Rh5 c4 20. Rd1 Ra7 21.
Qh3 Kh7 22. g4 f6 23. Be3 Rb7 24. f4 g6 25. Rh4 g5 26. Rh5 gxf4 27. Bxf4 Rg6
28. Rf1 Qg7 29. exf6 Bxf6 30. Bd2 d4 31. Na4 d3 32. cxd3 Bxb2+ 33. Kd1 Nf6
34. Nxb2 Rxb2 35. Bxh6 Rxh6 36. Rxh6+ Qxh6 37. Qxh6+ Kxh6 38. Rxf6+ Kg5 39.
Rf8 cxd3 40. Bxd3 Bb7 41. Rg8+ Kf4 42. Bc2 Rb5 43. Kd2 Rd5+ 44. Kc1 Rc5 45.
Kb2 Rb5+ 46. Ka1 Rg5 47. Rxg5 Kxg5 48. Bd1 Bg2 49. Be2 a5 50. Kb2 Bh3 51.
Kb3 Bxg4 52. Bxg4 Kxg4 53. Kc4 e5 54. h3+ Kf5 55. h4 e4 56. h5 Kg5 57. a4
Kxh5 58. Kd4 Kg5 59. Kxe4 Kf6 60. Kd5 Kf5 61. Kc5 Ke4 62. Kb6 Kd5 63. Kb5
Kd4 64. Ka6 Kc5 65. Kxa5 Kc6 66. Kb4 Kb6 67. Ka3 Ka5 68. Kb3 Ka6 69. Kb2 Kb6
70. Kc3 Kc6 {Game drawn by mutual agreement} 1/2-1/2

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.18"]
[Round "-"]
[White "DIEP"]
[Black "Rybka"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ICCResult "White resigns"]
[WhiteElo "2586"]
[BlackElo "2821"]
[Opening "QGD Slav accepted"]
[ECO "D15"]
[NIC "QG.05"]
[Time "03:05:45"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. Nf3 Nf6 4. Nc3 c6 5. Bg5 b5 6. e3 h6 7. Bh4 Be6 8.
Ne5 Nfd7 9. f4 g5 10. Bf2 Bg7 11. Be2 O-O 12. Bf3 Nxe5 13. fxe5 Qd7 14. Nxb5
Qb7 15. Nc3 Qxb2 16. Qc1 Qxc1+ 17. Rxc1 Rc8 18. Rb1 Nd7 19. Bg3 Nb6 20. Kd2
Rab8 21. e4 Rf8 22. Kc2 Rbd8 23. Rhd1 f6 24. exf6 Bxf6 25. e5 Bf5+ 26. Be4
Bxe4+ 27. Nxe4 Bg7 28. Nc5 Rb8 29. Ne6 Rfc8 30. Nxg7 Kxg7 31. e6 Ra8 32. Rd2
Nd5 33. Be5+ Kg6 34. Re2 Rf8 35. h3 a5 36. Rh1 Ra7 37. Rb1 a4 38. Bg3 Ra5
39. Re5 a3 40. Be1 Raa8 41. Bg3 Ra4 42. Kd2 c3+ 43. Kc2 Rxd4 44. Re2 c5 45.
Bf2 Nb4+ 46. Kxc3 Nd5+ 47. Kc2 Rc4+ 48. Kd3 Rc3+ 49. Kd2 c4 50. Rb7 Rd3+ 51.
Ke1 Nc3 52. Rd7 Nxe2 53. Kxe2 Rb8 54. Rxd3 Rb2+ 55. Rd2 c3 56. Be3 cxd2 57.
Bc5 Rxa2 58. Bxe7 Ra1 59. Kxd2 Rd1+ 60. Kxd1 a2 61. Kc2 a1=Q 62. Kd3 Qa6+
63. Kd4 Qxe6 64. Bc5 Qf6+ 65. Kd5 Qf5+ 66. Kd6 Qd3+ 67. Kc7 Qc2 68. Kd6 Qxg2
69. h4 gxh4 70. Ke6 {White resigns} 0-1

[Event "ICC 50 3 u"]
[Site "Internet Chess Club"]
[Date "2007.02.18"]
[Round "-"]
[White "Rybka"]
[Black "Scorpio-CCT9"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ICCResult "Black checkmated"]
[WhiteElo "2821"]
[BlackElo "2000"]
[Opening "Petrov: classical attack, Marshall variation"]
[ECO "C42"]
[NIC "RG.04"]
[Time "05:12:13"]
[TimeControl "3000+3"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6 3. Nxe5 d6 4. Nf3 Nxe4 5. d4 d5 6. Bd3 Bd6 7. O-O O-O 8.
c4 c6 9. Re1 Re8 10. Nc3 Nxc3 11. bxc3 Rxe1+ 12. Qxe1 h6 13. c5 Bc7 14. Ne5
Qf6 15. Ng4 Qe6 16. Bd2 b6 17. Ne3 Bd7 18. Qb1 Qf6 19. Qb3 Qf4 20. g3 Qf3
21. Re1 Qf6 22. a4 g6 23. a5 Qd8 24. f4 Bh3 25. f5 Nd7 26. fxg6 fxg6 27. c4
Qf6 28. cxd5 Rf8 29. dxc6+ Kg7 30. Qd1 Qxc6 31. Bc3 Nf6 32. Qc2 Qf3 33. cxb6
Bxg3 34. hxg3 Qxg3+ 35. Kh1 Ng4 36. d5+ Kg8 37. Nxg4 Bxg4 38. Bf1 Bd1 39.
Rxd1 Rf2 40. Qxf2 Qxf2 41. bxa7 Qxa7 42. Rd4 Qd7 43. a6 Kh7 44. Re4 Qxd5 45.
Bg2 Qh5+ 46. Kg1 Qd1+ 47. Bf1 Qc2 48. Re7+ Kg8 49. a7 Qb3 50. a8=Q+ Qb8 51.
Qxb8# {Black checkmated} 1-0
Parent - By Dr.X (Gold) Date 2007-02-18 22:57
Vas,

What are you feeding that fish?

Congratulation again, and again and again ad infinitum.

Robert
Parent - By FWCC (***) [us] Date 2007-02-18 22:57
A hardy congratulations to the Rybka team with this victory!

FWCC
Parent - - By Dadi Jonsson (Silver) [is] Date 2007-02-18 23:12
Congratulations! The last couple of rounds were very exciting. Also some strange things happened, like in the 6th round game where Spike missed a mate in one against Scorpio.

> Frank Wies and Victor Zakharov for fighting through all sorts of trouble to allow Rybka to use Jeroen's .ctg book on ICC


That's an interesting comment. Did you use Chess Assistant to interface with ICC?
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-02-19 23:23
Yes, that's right. Jeroen's .ctg book was converter using the new decoder, and we used Chess Assistant 9 to play in the tournament.

Vas
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-18 23:17
Congrats. Are you the proud new owner of an 8-core 2x E5345 (2.66 GHz)? I thought this might be Bjorn's machine but I don't see a credit...
Parent - - By Dr.X (Gold) Date 2007-02-18 23:37
If you buy an  Intel Xeon E5345 2.33GHz/Active Intel Xeon E5345 Quad-Core 2.33GHz 8MB from 8aNet Technology Inc.  they'll give you "free" ground shipping.

Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-18 23:45
Vas doesn't want that 2.33 Ghz crap. He needs the 2.66 GHz dual quad core to help steam roll the rest of us in the freestyle. :-)
Parent - - By Dr.X (Gold) Date 2007-02-18 23:51 Edited 2007-02-18 23:57
I can't even find a 2.66Ghz dual quad core-where the hell do you buy that?

Aah! Never mind. I have enough trouble finding change to get on the bus.

......................................

Did the CCT9 only run 7 rounds. I could not access the 8th and 9th round.
Parent - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-19 00:11
7 rounds were played.
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-02-19 23:27
The machine belongs to our operator, Frank Wies.

Unfortunately, I'm not familiar with the specs for the Xeon servers. The spec I gave (E5345, 2.66 GHz) may well have a typo.

Re. the freestyle, we'll have two QX6700s and an Opteron 275. I'm thinking about trying to overclock the QX6700s, some of the overclocks which people are mentioning seem quite tempting.

Vas
Parent - - By Gaмßito (****) [cr] Date 2007-02-19 00:16
Hello!

Vas, congratulations to you and for all your team for this nice victory. Also many thanks for the pgn, i´ll see the games very soon.

Regards!
Gambitto
Parent - - By M ANSARI (*****) [kw] Date 2007-02-19 06:03
That is some nasty hardware.  I know that the Clovertown cpu's can be hard wired to run at 3.2 Ghz ... but I wouldn't want to mess with those chips.  Also I was unaware of a 2.66 Quad Xeon cpu ... I thought the highest was a 2.4 ghz.
Parent - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-19 06:46
Actually, there is some confusion associated with Vas's original post. The E5345 Xeon that he calls out runs at 2.33 GHz, while the X5355 Xeon runs at the 2.66 GHz he mentions in his post. Its generally not a trivial task to overclock server boards, so this is something of a mystery.
Parent - - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) [de] Date 2007-02-19 11:55
Engeneering samples were max. 2.4 ghz, running at a bus speed of 266 mhz. They could be overclocked by a pin mod to 333 fsb. E5345 has 2.33 ghz, X5355 has 2.66 ghz, both have a fsb of 333 mhz. And there is no chance of overclocking these cpus. One of these cpus has 4 cores and no hyperthreading, so a computer with 2 of them has 8 cores. I´ve got a 2x Xeon X5355 myself.
Parent - - By Nick (*****) [gb] Date 2007-02-19 18:45
333 FSB seems a bit slow - I'm using an IBM x3650 server, which has two Xeon 5160's and an FSB of 1333 Mhz.  See http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/uk/x/rack/x3650/
Parent - - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-19 19:34
Same thing. The memory system is quad pumped so 4 X 333 ~ 1333.
Parent - By Nick (*****) [gb] Date 2007-02-19 21:17
The subtle difference is that the three letters "FSB" are reserved for the effective speed at which the bus runs, so after the pin mod mentioned by the original poster, "333 bus speed" is correct but "333 fsb" just looked odd.
Parent - By Banned for Life (Gold) Date 2007-02-19 19:37
I'm trying to picture Vas hacking at his new octal core server board with a soldering iron... Nah, it would have to be Iweta.
Parent - - By Uri Blass (*****) [il] Date 2007-02-19 09:25
You claim that rybka was able to see the tactical line prior to move 34 but my rybka2.3 needs a very long time to see it even one ply later after 34.dxc4 that was not played.

I know that my hardware is slower(A3000(2 ghz with 512 mbytes hash tables)) but the question is what is the speed difference between it and 8-core 2x E5345 (2.66 GHz) and if this hardware mean 16 processors.


Here is my analysis:

Rybka - ban, ICC 50 1 Internet Chess Club 2007
2b5/1r4qk/p3pnrp/7R/N1P3P1/P6Q/1b1BB2P/3K1R2 b - - 0 1


Analysis by Rybka 2.3 32-bit :

34...Nxh5
  =  (-0.17)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
34...Nxh5
  =  (-0.18)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
34...Nxh5
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6
  ²  (0.42)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6 36.Nxb2
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  7kN
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6 36.Nxb2 Rxb2 37.Rxf6 Rxd2+ 38.Kxd2 Qxf6
  ±  (1.06)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  18kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6 Kxg7
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 7   00:00:01  75kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6
  ±  (0.98)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  90kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6 Kxg7 40.Rxa6 Rb1+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 9   00:00:02  116kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+ Kxh6 38.Rxf6+ Kg7 39.Rc6 Rd7+ 40.Kc2 Bb7 41.Nc5
  ±  (0.87)   Depth: 10   00:00:07  453kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (0.83)   Depth: 11   00:00:09  528kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.03)   Depth: 12   00:00:11  670kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.06)   Depth: 13   00:00:17  951kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.02)   Depth: 14   00:00:31  1753kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.02)   Depth: 15   00:00:47  2665kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.05)   Depth: 16   00:01:20  4501kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (0.96)   Depth: 17   00:02:41  9296kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (0.98)   Depth: 18   00:05:22  17984kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.07)   Depth: 19   00:12:36  36637kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (1.12)   Depth: 20   00:25:29  74647kN
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6 36.Nxb2 Rxf1+ 37.Bxf1 Qxb2 38.Bd3+ Kg8 39.Bxh6 Qb3+ 40.Ke2 Qb2+ 41.Bd2
  ²  (0.28)   Depth: 20   00:48:22  164140kN

(,  19.02.2007)
Parent - - By Hamlet (**) [fi] Date 2007-02-19 10:04
Uri. Here is same analysi by my Dual Core 6300 (2 cores) under 64-bit Win xp. I guess that 8 core is 3-4 times faster:

Analysis by Rybka 2.3 mp :

1...Nf6xh5
  =  (-0.17)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5
  =  (-0.18)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6
  ²  (0.42)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  12kN
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 4.Rf1xf6 Rb2xd2+ 5.Kd1xd2 Qg7xf6
  ±  (1.19)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  30kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6 Kh7xg7
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  74kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6
  ±  (1.10)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  89kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6 Kh7xg7 7.Rf6xa6 Rb2-b1+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 9   00:00:00  119kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (0.94)   Depth: 10   00:00:03  828kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.99)   Depth: 11   00:00:04  897kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.94)   Depth: 12   00:00:05  1044kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 13   00:00:06  1287kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.99)   Depth: 14   00:00:08  1782kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (1.02)   Depth: 15   00:00:14  3102kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (1.05)   Depth: 16   00:00:25  5472kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (1.08)   Depth: 17   00:00:46  10091kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (1.05)   Depth: 18   00:01:31  20019kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (1.07)   Depth: 19   00:02:55  38705kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (1.08)   Depth: 20   00:05:49  76468kN
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2 Rf6xf1+ 4.Be2xf1 Qg7xb2 5.Bf1-d3+ Kh7-h8 6.Qh3-f3 Qb2-a1+ 7.Kd1-e2 Qa1-g7 8.Bd2-c3
  =  (0.22)   Depth: 20   00:15:15  222mN
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2 Rf6xf1+ 4.Be2xf1 Qg7xb2 5.Bf1-d3+ Kh7-h8 6.Qh3-f3 Qb2-a1+ 7.Kd1-e2 Qa1-g7 8.Bd2-c3
  =  (0.21)   Depth: 21   00:19:20  286mN
Parent - - By karmazen_robert (**) [es] Date 2007-04-19 10:19 Edited 2007-04-19 10:24
Hello, I´m spanisht sorry my english write,

I´m think that all that are incorrect test...


[quote]
I know that my hardware is slower(A3000(2 ghz with 512 mbytes hash tables)) but the question is what is the speed difference between it and 8-core 2x E5345 (2.66 GHz) and if this hardware mean 16 processors.

Here is my analysis:

Rybka - ban, ICC 50 1 Internet Chess Club 2007
2b5/1r4qk/p3pnrp/7R/N1P3P1/P6Q/1b1BB2P/3K1R2 b - - 0 1
         
Start<>End

Analysis by Rybka 2.3 32-bit :

34...Nxh5
  =  (-0.17)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
34...Nxh5
  =  (-0.18)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
34...Nxh5
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6
  ²  (0.42)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6 36.Nxb2
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  7kN
34...Nxh5 35.gxh5 Rf6 36.Nxb2 Rxb2 37.Rxf6 Rxd2+ 38.Kxd2 Qxf6
  ±  (1.06)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  18kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6 Kxg7
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 7   00:00:01  75kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6
  ±  (0.98)   Depth: 8   00:00:01  90kN
34...e5 35.Nxb2 Rxb2 36.Rxh6+ Rxh6 37.Bxh6 Bxg4 38.Bxg7+ Bxh3 39.Rxf6 Kxg7 40.Rxa6 Rb1+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 9   00:00:02  116kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+ Kxh6 38.Rxf6+ Kg7 39.Rc6 Rd7+ 40.Kc2 Bb7 41.Nc5
  ±  (0.87)   Depth: 10   00:00:07  453kN
34...e5 35.Bxh6 Rxh6 36.Rxh6+ Qxh6 37.Qxh6+
  ±  (0.83)   Depth: 11   00:00:09  528kN
[/quote]


Ok... we read times and number of positions by nodo Kn/S.

[/quote]

Uri. Here is same analysi by my Dual Core 6300 (2 cores) under 64-bit Win xp. I guess that 8 core is 3-4 times faster:

Analysis by Rybka 2.3 mp :

1...Nf6xh5
  =  (-0.17)   Depth: 2   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5
  =  (-0.18)   Depth: 3   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5
  ³  (-0.28)   Depth: 4   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6
  ²  (0.42)   Depth: 5   00:00:00
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2
  ²  (0.52)   Depth: 6   00:00:00  12kN
1...Nf6xh5 2.g4xh5 Rg6-f6 3.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 4.Rf1xf6 Rb2xd2+ 5.Kd1xd2 Qg7xf6
  ±  (1.19)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  30kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6 Kh7xg7
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 7   00:00:00  74kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6
  ±  (1.10)   Depth: 8   00:00:00  89kN
1...e6-e5 2.Na4xb2 Rb7xb2 3.Rh5xh6+ Rg6xh6 4.Bd2xh6 Bc8xg4 5.Bh6xg7+ Bg4xh3 6.Rf1xf6 Kh7xg7 7.Rf6xa6 Rb2-b1+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 9   00:00:00  119kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (0.94)   Depth: 10   00:00:03  828kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.99)   Depth: 11   00:00:04  897kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.94)   Depth: 12   00:00:05  1044kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+
  ±  (0.97)   Depth: 13   00:00:06  1287kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+ Kh7xh6 5.Rf1xf6+ Kh6-g7 6.Rf6-c6 Rb7-d7+ 7.Kd1-c2 Bc8-b7 8.Rc6-e6
  ±  (0.99)   Depth: 14   00:00:08  1782kN
1...e6-e5 2.Bd2xh6 Rg6xh6 3.Rh5xh6+ Qg7xh6 4.Qh3xh6+

[/quote]

but now we see that ¡¡¡

Ok... we read times and number of positions by nodo Kn/S.

The number of positions test in funtion plys NOT Is correct... the ENgINE not is the same, this mean that not is posible compare these CPU´s... on 10 plys, one engine calculate 453 Kn/s and the other engine calculate 828 Kn/s... uff if it 10 plys complety why not have  similar Kn/s and other time ???

is this correct ? not is posible use the same engine ? on other theme, you can use to test that version of 32 bits, under conroe 64... runs ok ?

I think that the CPU speed not is so relevant in real games... because the solutions comes on times by move so fast 3 minutes or 5 for move... up of this not is real evaluation of engine...

bye since Spain, Oliver
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-04-19 11:42
There is always some "search luck". For Rybka, the nodes-per-second measure how good the hardware is. For other engines, nodes-per-second measures how good hardware is when the number of cores or CPUs is the same.

Vas
Parent - By Lukas Cimiotti (Bronze) [de] Date 2007-02-19 18:57
2x E5345 has only 2.33 ghz and "only" 8 cores without hyperthreading. In current Rybka versions 8 cores are 2.85 times faster than 1 core. In general, new Intel cpus are 20% faster than AMD, so that computer should be 2.85 x 2.33/2 x 1.2 = 3.98  - roughly 4 times faster than yours
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-02-19 23:30
Two further comments:

1) Rybka likes 33. .. Nf6 even at low depths, so that move was likely a ponderhit.
2) Rybka definitely saw everything to the very end, because until she can assign a 0.00 score to the position at the end of that line (ie. after 40. .. Qb1+), she will prefer 34. dxc4 by a huge margin (something like 0.7 pawns).

Vas
Parent - - By Henrik Dinesen (***) [dk] Date 2007-02-19 12:36
I'm in the line congratulating with the great performance of Rybka!
Parent - By Dr.X (Gold) Date 2007-02-19 14:27
It seems odd referring to chess engine competitions as a "Sport" -it seems odd to me referring to any chess competition as a sport.

Only because it has always seemed to me to be more then just a sport. I am sure that every sport can be reduced in some way to a scientific theorem. But chess always seemed to be to be the quintessentially practiced and played out science.

With computer chess programing and computer chess tournaments-it becomes an exacting science with exponentially more variables at stake. I wonder if future programs may just learn to avoid those predictable moves-forcing the game analysts to take on an entirely new set of quantifiers.

I don't even know if any of this makes sense at all.

sidserious
Parent - - By George Tsavdaris (****) Date 2007-02-19 15:32

>Vas:
>33. Kd1 ?? Nf6! and the position is already drawn. The reason is the deepest variation I've ever seen in an engine-engine game (freestyle play >is another story): 34. dxc4 Nxh5 35. gxh5 Rf6 36. Nxb2 Rxf1+ 37. Bxf1 Qxb2 38. Qd3+ Kg8 39. Qd8+ Kg7 40. Qxc8 Qb1+ and white cannot >avoid a perpetual (or at least so says Rybka). Chess can be pretty deep!


Well then you haven't seen enough :-)
For example:

In game-1 i won playing only from the book the whole game in an extremely deep line that my opponent in Playchess with Rybka 2.1c happily played(he was out of book in move 25).
The line that starts with 13.Qd3 is incredibly deep and has a double Bishop sacrifice! Or anyway the line that starts with 26.Qe4?! is again very very deep and Rybka 1.2 doesn't have a clue of the position. As it seems from the game R2.1c doesn't have a clue either believing 27...Kd7?? draws while it loses....

In game-2 The King started in 32th move, an amazing and very deep double sacrifice while giving as an exchange also a Rook later!
This sacrifice leads to a forced win for white 27 plies later!!!!!!!

In game-3 in the famous Ferret-Gandalf game, Ferret started with 43.e5! one of the most amazing attacks in the compter Chess world. A damn deep one of course too.....

[Event "Game-1"]
[Site "playchess.com #074607"]
[Date "2006.10.07"]
[Round "8"]
[White "GeorgeTsavdaris"]
[Black "Rybka 2.1c mp"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "B81"]
[WhiteElo "2817"]
[BlackElo "2474"]
[Annotator "Tsavdaris,George"]
[PlyCount "77"]
[EventDate "2006.10.07"]

1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4 cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 a6 6. Be3 e6 7. g4 e5 8. Nf5
g6 9. g5 gxf5 10. exf5 d5 11. gxf6 d4 12. Bc4 Qc7 13. Qd3 dxe3 14. O-O-O exf2
15. Bxf7+ Kxf7 16. Qd5+ Kxf6 17. Ne4+ Ke7 18. f6+ Ke8 19. f7+ Ke7 20. Qd2 Qb6
21. Qg5+ Kxf7 22. Rhf1 Bh6 23. Rxf2+ Ke8 24. Rd8+ Qxd8 25. Qxh6 Qd4 $6 26. Qf6
Qxe4 $6 27. Qxh8+ Kd7 $4 {Loses by force!} 28. Rd2+ Kc6 29. Qf6+ $3 Kb5 30. a4+
$3 Kxa4 31. b3+ Ka3 32. Qd6+ Qb4 33. Qxe5 Qxd2+ 34. Kxd2 Nc6 35. Qf4 $3 Kb2 36.
Qf6+ Ka3 37. Kc1 $1 Kb4 38. Qg5 $1 Be6 39. Qe3 1-0

[Event "Game-2"]
[Site "Thessaloniki"]
[Date "2005.11.12"]
[Round "?"]
[White "The King"]
[Black "Tao 5.6"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "D27"]
[PlyCount "95"]

1. d4 d5 2. c4 dxc4 3. e3 Nf6 4. Bxc4 e6 5. Nf3 a6 6. O-O c5 7. Bb3 b5 8. a4 b4
9. Nbd2 Bb7 10. a5 Be7 11. Nc4 O-O 12. Nb6 Ra7 13. Qe2 Qc7 14. Bd2 Nc6 15. dxc5
Bxc5 16. Rfc1 Bxb6 17. axb6 Qxb6 18. e4 Raa8 19. Be3 Qd8 20. Bc5 Re8 21. Rd1
Qc7 22. Bd6 Qb6 23. e5 Nd7 24. Rac1 a5 25. Qd3 a4 26. Bc2 g6 27. Qd2 Kg7 28.
Be4 Rac8 29. Rc4 a3 30. bxa3 bxa3 31. Ng5 a2 32. Nxf7 Kxf7 33. Bxg6+ hxg6 34.
Qh6 Re7 35. Qh7+ Ke8 36. Qxg6+ Kd8 37. Rxc6 Qxc6 38. Qg8+ Nf8 39. Qxf8+ Qe8 40.
Bxe7+ Kc7 41. Bd6+ Kb6 42. Bc7+ Kb5 43. Qa3 Rxc7 44. Qxa2 Rc4 45. Rb1+ Rb4 46.
Rxb4+ Kxb4 47. Qb2+ Kc5 48. Qxb7 1-0

[Event "Game-3"]
[Site "Thessaloniki"]
[Date "2001.??.??"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Ferret"]
[Black "Gandalf"]
[Result "1-0"]
[ECO "C92"]
[PlyCount "149"]

1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nc6 3. Bb5 a6 4. Ba4 Nf6 5. O-O Be7 6. Re1 b5 7. Bb3 d6 8. c3
O-O 9. h3 Bb7 10. d4 Re8 11. Nbd2 Bf8 12. a4 h6 13. Bc2 exd4 14. cxd4 Nb4 15.
Bb1 g6 16. Ra3 Bg7 17. Nh2 c5 18. d5 Nd7 19. Ndf3 h5 20. Nf1 bxa4 21. Qxa4 a5
22. Ne3 Ba6 23. Qd1 c4 24. Nd2 Ne5 25. Rf1 Qb6 26. Kh2 c3 27. bxc3 Bxf1 28.
Qxf1 Na6 29. Rb3 Qc7 30. c4 Nb4 31. Qd1 Nd7 32. Nef1 Nc5 33. Rf3 a4 34. Kg1
Reb8 35. Rg3 Qe7 36. Ba3 Be5 37. Re3 Bf4 38. Rf3 Qe5 39. h4 Bh6 40. Ne3 Nb3 41.
Ndf1 Bxe3 42. Nxe3 Qa1 43. e5 Qxa3 44. Rxf7 Kxf7 45. Qf3+ Kg8 46. Qf6 Qa1 47.
Qe6+ Kf8 48. Qxd6+ Ke8 49. Qxg6+ Kd8 50. d6 Kc8 51. Qf7 Qxb1+ 52. Kh2 Na6 53.
e6 Nbc5 54. e7 Qe4 55. d7+ Nxd7 56. e8=Q+ Qxe8 57. Qxe8+ Kc7 58. Nd5+ Kc6 59.
Qe6+ Kc5 60. Qxd7 a3 61. Qf5 Kxc4 62. Ne3+ Kc3 63. Qc2+ Kb4 64. Qc4+ Ka5 65.
Qc3+ Kb5 66. Qb3+ Kc6 67. Qa4+ Kb6 68. Qxa3 Rh8 69. Qd6+ Kb5 70. Qe5+ Nc5 71.
Qb2+ Kc6 72. Qf6+ Kb5 73. Nd5 Rhc8 74. Qb2+ Kc6 75. Ne7+ 1-0
Parent - By Vasik Rajlich (Silver) [hu] Date 2007-02-19 23:34
It should be a position where the engine plays the wrong move because of the failure to appreciate some specific tactical point.

Either that, or it should be played by somebody who searches thirty times better than Rybka in CCT :) (Rybka would need about 30 minutes on our CCT hardware to see that 33. Kd1 leads to a draw.)

Vas

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill