Comments by catugo
No that doesn't work either, I never seen time trouble in 15mins+15secs in 20 games now (not even with the old program), but that's simply to slow!
I think, I managed to solve the time trouble, It camed from cloning Fmax by copying to a second exe file.I can't explain it why but it consumed a lot of resources, by comparison to the fairy max.exe proper. I have to play more games but it seems fine, now.
Nope, that was not it, still getting in time trouble at game 4!
It Works! The problem was that everything was in 1 folder!
So, it works, now I'm going to setup pawn odds games in order to see how strong the pawns are and then games aancas vs griffins, aancas vs queens, griffins vs queens and equivalent for apothecary 2.
I think archbihop vs queen will lead to expected results.
I'm so excited , thanks for the opportunity!
H.G.
FYI: In your apothecary 2 variant pawn promotes to zebra.
H.G.
If I have the time defeat disabled, is there a way to find out if negative time was ever an issue in my experiments?
H.G.,
And one more question:
Is there a way to see partial results?
I meant otherwiselly than writing a small c++ program that prelucrates the final string from the *.trn file
Well, I did not see any time trouble lately so I think we are ok in 5.02b3. I'll think I'll stick to all pieces (-odds pawn) for now because of that!
I'm quite confident that the article applies to weak engines, too!
I think a very strong engine will always win pawn odds games!
H.G.
Kevin Pacey's link makes me wonder. How do we take into account the engine strength in our experiments? Suppose we make n experiments at 40moves/1min and n experiments at 40moves/2mins.We get obviously a better pawn in the second experiment. How does this relate to the real strength of the pawn, whatever that means?
About the games being tedious, Ive just seen a 280 moves apothecary 2 game KRBPvsKA endgame. Quite cool!
Kevin,
I personally would be interested in finding out if there is room for variants like apothecary chess which use weird pieces like the griffin, aanca or zebra (which is weird enough on a 10x10 board). I think there is.
Chess has some arbitrary aspects to it like en passant and castling, but they complete the game.
One of the cristicisms brought by Fergus to my variants was that they don't use "classic" fairy pieces like the marshall and archbishop, and the regular knight (by indicating gross chess as an better alternative to my apothecary). My point here was to enhance chess by adding new pieces and expanding the board. If I failed please state that, I could stop!
I have finished the pawn odds experiments for both apothecary 1 and apothecary 2 games.
The experiments were setup in the following way:
In the bishops inside initial setup a8 pawn gets deleted
In the bishops inside initial setup a3 pawn gets deleted
In the knights inside initial setup a8 pawn gets deleted
In the knights inside initial setup a3 pawn gets deleted
In the bishops inside initial setup b8 pawn gets deleted
In the bishops inside initial setup b3 pawn gets deleted
In the knights inside initial setup b8 pawn gets deleted
In the knights inside initial setup b3 pawn gets deleted
repeat for each column until j for a total of 40 games
repeat for 25 times.
Total number of games=1000
Apothecary 1 results:
normal setup side wins: 529
draws:124
deleted pawn side wins:347
normal setup side points:591
deleted pawn side points:409
Apothecary 2 results:
normal setup side wins: 531
draws:164
deleted pawn side wins:305
normal setup side points:613
deleted pawn side points:387
Now I'm starting Griffins vs Aancas and Marshals vs Archbishops respectively.
It is likely that the Marshals vs Archbishops experiments will confirm the already known Grand chess values.
The difference between Griffins and Aancas on the other hand is virtually unknown in previous games.
I think it is normal for the pawn in apothecary 2 to worth a tiny bit more than in apothecary 1 as the minor pieces there are weaker.
Also there will be a Queens vs Griffins experiment, coming up next after griffins vs aancas.
About R-P vs N and R+P vs 2N, keep in mind that knights aren't the same nor the same with the classic knights so they have to be measured first. Moreover I'd rather put an aanca/archbishop -pawn(s) at the upper bound of a rook. It makes more sense to me as it involves the natural progression of pieces.
Thank you, H.G.
H.G.,
If you don't mind me asking. From where the 45% comes, I don't get it!
H.G.,
Preliminary results in apothecary 1 show after 130-ish games 65% points for griffins in their fight against aancas, nothing strange here.
But, in apothecary 2 I have in also 130-ish games only 52% for marshalls against archbishops. Could this be correct. I don't see it! What do you think? I can't find a gross error yet, but it certaintly seems so!
25 comments displayed
Permalink to the exact comments currently displayed.
I guess I'll switch to 5mins+5secs, it never lost on time with added time as time trouble has a slightly different meaning here.