An engines tourney, and some toughts about openings.

Yesterday, I make a suicide engine tourney on one of my computer between 4 engines:

  • Sjeng (version 11.2), the most popular suicide engine. I used it with his default settings, default opening book and 3 piece egtb. (link)
  • Wizard (version 3.1), the demo / free version. Default settings (link)
  • Pulsar (version 2009-9b) , with his default settings. (link)
  • Nessjeng, a version of sjeng (11.2) that I have made, default settings and 3 pieces egtb
  • I was sure that my own version of sjeng will finish higher that sjeng, but I wanted to compare with others.
    The tourney was a 50 games Round-robin of 1 minute with 1 second incremental.

    Here the result:
    Nessjeng 117.5 / 150
    Wizard 94 / 150
    Sjeng 87.5 / 150
    Pulsar 10 / 150

    All games can be download in one big .pgn file here.

    What changes have I made to sjeng ?
    Simply, a way better opening book. Ok, I must confess that isn’t a simple handmade opening book, I had connect a sjeng on the huge opening book of suicidechess.ca .
    I got this idea several months ago, when I started to program a opening book layer of StayAlive( a wizard engine running on FICS) for Neca.
    Recently for the job, I needed to do some C/C++ programming. It was my first real C/C++ program. When I looked that Sjeng source code, I saw that could be easy to connect it to the opening book database.

    I knew that Sjeng and wizard have some weakness in their openings, but I didn’t tough that will be that much.

    There’s a lot of better chess engine programmer than me, but many underestimate the importance of the opening. I strongly suggest to new engine programmer to invest their time in all game phase: opening, middle game and endgame. It’s true not only for the suicide variant, but for all chess variant.

    Currently, i’m only under windows, so I can’t compare these engines vs linux engines. But if you know others engines to throw-in, I can easily run others tourney.

    Publicités