Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old July 8th 10, 03:52 PM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

A lot of fans of Rybka (Taylor Kingston being one of them) think it's
better because it's more positional. But the latest Rybka, ver 4, is
more tactical says the author, and much stronger.

An admission that the previous "positional" Rybka was flawed.

Just like I always knew and suspected.

RL

http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=6382

Rybka 4 is here and stronger than ever
31.05.2010 The chess engine Rybka has become the touchstone in
computer chess. It has won three world championships, and just this
weekend came first in the super-strong ICT10 computer tournament in
Holland. Rybka 4 is now available and can be directly ordered from
ChessBase. But before you go clicking away in our shop you may want to
read this interview with author Vasik Rajlich.
  #2   Report Post  
Old July 8th 10, 08:45 PM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,146
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On Jul 8, 10:52*am, RayLopez99 wrote:

A lot of fans of Rybka (Taylor Kingston being one of them) think it's
better because it's more positional. *But the latest Rybka, ver 4, is
more tactical says the author, and much stronger.



*Much* stronger, Phil? I think this might be what SOME people
refer
to as 'hyperbole.' It is after all the job of the marketing
department or
individual to trumpet the strengths of a new product in order to
generate
sales -- and hopefully, profits.


An admission that the previous "positional" Rybka was flawed.

Just like I always knew and suspected.



Just *as* you always knew and suspected. Haven't the many
spell-checking nutters here in rgc taught you anything?


I bought a program which claimed to have won several awards for the
allegedly high quality of its game annotations. But so far this
program's
commentaries regarding the games I've fed it have been just plain
awful.

In one example it said something to the effect that a different
move
would have saved the game, but then spat out a numerical evaluation
of
that 'saving move' which clearly indicated otherwise. Sloppy work.

And if you wish to watch and learn as the program analyses you will
find that rather difficult as it is always examining a position that
does
not currently appear on the graphic chessboard. Often it appears to
be
considering illegal moves, although I've yet to see it recommend one
of
them.

But these are mere nitpicks. My main complaint is that the
majority
of the time, the program just spits out stupid output (not unlike
certain
trolls around these parts). How could they have won several awards
for
this slop? Are such awards handed out like candy on Halloween?
Well,
I would like to see some examples of these purported awards. Maybe
those games were just anomalies.
  #3   Report Post  
Old July 8th 10, 11:32 PM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On Jul 8, 10:45*pm, The Master wrote:

I would like to see some examples of these purported awards. *Maybe
those games were just anomalies.


I would like to see examples of bad analysis that you claim exists.
To date, most chess programs do competent analysis, often finding the
best move in under five seconds.

But, as usual, The Minor, you can spend 15 minutes with a verbose post
to make your point but you can't spend 1 minute to upload a game of
yours to illustrate your points.

RL
  #4   Report Post  
Old July 9th 10, 12:39 AM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,146
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On Jul 8, 6:32*pm, raylopez99 wrote:

On Jul 8, 10:45*pm, The Master wrote:

I would like to see some examples of these purported awards. *Maybe
those games were just anomalies.


I would like to see examples of bad analysis that you claim exists.



OK. See my next post in this thread in oh, perhaps an hour from
now.


To date, most chess programs do competent analysis, often finding the
best move in under five seconds.



Why change the subject? Finding the best move is quite another
matter
from generating high quality textual game annotations (for which
these
awards are claimed to have been won).


But, as usual, The Minor, you can spend 15 minutes with a verbose post
to make your point but you can't spend 1 minute to upload a game of
yours to illustrate your points.



Uh, Phil-- you *only now* asked for a specific example. Sometimes I
have
to wonder if your mind has not deteriorated to the point where you
don't even
know where you are in time. Were you not still young, people might
begin
to imagine that you are suffering from a severe age-related mental
disease.

I will be looking forward to seeing your own (peculiar) take on
these odd,
computer generated textual commentaries. Please do not attempt to
find
move improvements-- this will be exceedingly difficult as Fritz is
your vast
superior!




  #5   Report Post  
Old July 9th 10, 01:01 AM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jan 2010
Posts: 292
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On 9 July, 00:39, The Master wrote:
On Jul 8, 6:32*pm, raylopez99 wrote:

On Jul 8, 10:45*pm, The Master wrote:


I would like to see some examples of these purported awards. *Maybe
those games were just anomalies.


I would like to see examples of bad analysis that you claim exists.


* OK. *See my next post in this thread in oh, perhaps an hour from
now.

To date, most chess programs do competent analysis, often finding the
best move in under five seconds.


* Why change the subject? *Finding the best move is quite another
matter
from generating high quality textual game annotations (for which
these
awards are claimed to have been won).

But, as usual, The Minor, you can spend 15 minutes with a verbose post
to make your point but you can't spend 1 minute to upload a game of
yours to illustrate your points.


Uh, Phil-- you *only now* asked for a specific example. *Sometimes I
have
to wonder if your mind has not deteriorated to the point where you
don't even
know where you are in time. *Were you not still young, people might
begin
to imagine that you are suffering from a severe age-related mental
disease.

* I will be looking forward to seeing your own (peculiar) take on
these odd,
computer generated textual commentaries. *Please do not attempt to
find
move improvements-- this will be exceedingly difficult as Fritz is
your vast
superior!


Exactly how vast *is* Fritz, Greg?

You're replying to Ray Lopez, not Phil Innes.


  #6   Report Post  
Old July 10th 10, 01:10 AM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,536
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On Jul 10, 3:02*am, The Master wrote:

* In particular, I would note the comments regarding white 'having a
cramped position' after just four moves(!!), the startling idea that
a
terribly weak computer could 'lose its nerve,' and the seemingly
random insertions of such catchy phrases as 'get the cat off the tree'
or 'cannot change what is in store.'


WTF you talking about Minor? Basically, the "Boris Diplomat"
opponent--are you saying it was a computer not a human?--misplayed an
opening, lost a pawn for nothing, got pinned and attacked at b7, and
blundered with the knight move at move 9. Not a brilliant game, just
a catastrophe in the opening. OK, re-reading your post, you
apparently are attacking the Fritz auto-annotation. I don't have any
problem with the annotation, but it was a weak badly played game
that's all.


* In my view, this analyst may very well know what is the strongest
move, who is on top, and how many moves until checkmate, but a
human player -- however weak -- could do better than these random
jibberings. *A squirrel? *Perhaps not. *But then most squirrels don't
play chess.


You don't play chess either, or you'd post one of your better games.

RL
  #7   Report Post  
Old July 10th 10, 02:03 AM posted to rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Dec 2009
Posts: 1,146
Default Rybka 4 is stronger...ergo Rybka 3 was weak

On Jul 9, 8:10*pm, raylopez99 wrote:

WTF you talking about Minor? *



I understand that you are mentally impaired, so out of pity I will
try
to refresh your memory. You very recently requested that I provide
examples of 'bad' commentary by the self-described award winning
chess program. Well, I have thus far only managed to scrounge up
and post a single example of *precisely what you requested* on
account of my computer being so busy with other work.

Now, there is no question but that Fritz is a super-strong chess
engine! Everyone knows this. My original complaint was in regard
to the *textual commentary* for which the marketing people had
claimed numerous awards. I asked if there were any examples of
this award winning stuff floating about, and you of course failed to
provide any (while at the same time changing the subject to one in
which we both happen to agree).

Meanwhile, although failing to answer my request, you had no
compunction (here, Phil: www.dictionary.com) regarding making
your own irate 'demand' to see examples of 'bad' commentary. I
now have provided one such example... and it goes without saying
that you have responded in no more intelligent a fashion than
would say, a deranged blowfish.
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Game with Rybka Drawn. !!! Sanny rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 4 June 4th 08 05:45 PM
Game with Rybka Drawn. !!! Sanny rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 5 June 4th 08 05:45 PM
Game with Rybka Drawn. !!! Sanny rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 2 June 4th 08 05:45 PM
Rybka and Open Letter to FIDE? Thomas T. Veldhouse rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 6 June 7th 07 03:06 PM
Strongest program C.C.LONGTHORP rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 37 December 19th 05 07:21 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017