the lowest consistent ENGINE MATCH for a very strong player is something i would like to know.
so far it seems that xanthos is the winner with:
2 games analysed ...
[White "arrakis"]
[Black "XanthosNZ"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B75"]
[Annotator "Fritz 8 (60s)"]
[PlyCount "96"]
[TimeControl "300"]
{B75: Sicilian Dragon: Yugoslav Attack, Miscellaneous} 1. e4 c5 2. Nf3 d6 3. d4
cxd4 4. Nxd4 Nf6 5. Nc3 g6 6. Be3 Bg7 7. f3 O-O 8. Qd2 Nc6 9. O-O-O Bd7 10. g4 Rc8 11. h4 Ne5 12. h5 Qa5 13. hxg6 fxg6 14. Kb1N Rxc3 15. Qxc3 Qxc3 16. bxc3 Nxf3 17. Nxf3 Nxe4 18. Bc4+ e6
19. Rdf1 Nxc3+
(19... d5 20. Bd3 Ng3 21. Rhg1 Nxf1 22. Rxf1 =)
20. Kc1 d5 21. Bb3 Ne2+ 22. Kd2 Ng3 23. Rhg1 Nxf1+ 24. Rxf1 d4 25. Bg5 Kh8 26. Nh2 Rxf1 27. Nxf1 e5
(27... a5 28. Bd8 a4 29. Bc4=)
28. Nh2 e4
(28... h6 29. Be7 =)
29. Bf4 e3+
(29... g5 30. Bb8 Bc6 31. Be6 =)
30. Ke1 h5 31. gxh5 gxh5 32. Bg3 Bf6 33. Nf3 Bc6 34. Be5 Bxe5 35. Nxe5 Kg7
(35...Be4 36. Bc4 =)
36. Ke2 h4
(36... Kf6=)
37. Nf3 h3 38. Nh2 Kf6 39. Bc4 Kg5
(39... b5 40. Bb3 -+) 40. c3 dxc3 41. Kxe3 b5 42. Be6 Kh4 43. a3 a5 44. Bf5 b4 45. axb4 axb4 46. Kd3 Kg3 47. Nf1+ Kf4 48. Bxh3 Be4+
(48... Be4+ 49. Ke2 b3 50. Ne3 b2 51. Nd5+ Bxd5 52. Bf5 Kxf5 53. Kd3 b1=Q+ 54. Kd4 c2 55. Kxd5 Qb6 56. Kc4 c1=Q+ 57. Kd3 Qbe3 0-1 A64 3500+ 1GB RAM analysing only my moves. 80% MATCH
and
[Event "Let there be Hockey Again I"]
[Site "http://www.timeforchess.com"]
[Date "2005.08.05"]
[Round "2"]
[White "Yozzer"]
[Black "XanthosNZ"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[Annotator "Fritz 8 (60s)"]
[PlyCount "71"]
1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 g6 3. Nc3 Bg7 4. e4 d6 5. Nf3 O-O 6. Be2 e5 7. O-O Nc6 8. d5 Ne7 9. Nd2 a5 10. a3 Bd7 11. b3 Ne8 12. Rb1 c5 13. b4 b6 14. bxc5 bxc5
15. Qc2 a4N (15... f5) 16. Re1 f5 17. Nf3 Nf6 (17... f4) 18. Ng5 f4 (18... Qc8) 19. h3 Bh6 (19... h6) 20. h4 Qa5 (20... Bg7) 21. Bd2 Qa6 (21... Qd8) 22. Rb2 Rfb8 (22... Bg7) 23. Reb1 Qa7 (23... Qc8) 24. Nb5 Bxb5 (24... Qb6) 25. Rxb5 Rxb5 26. Rxb5 Rb8 (26... Qd7) 27. Rxb8+ Qxb8 28. f3 Bxg5 (28... Bg7) 29. hxg5 Nh5 30. Qxa4 Qb1+ 31. Qd1 Qb2 32. a4 Ng3 33. a5 (33. Kh2) 33... Qa3 (33...Kg7) 34. Kh2 Kg7 (34... Kf7) 35. Be1 Nxe2 (35... h5) 36. Qxe2 1/2-1/2 33% MATCH
an average of 65%
does xanthos average higher than this when we look at more games? or are other players able to maintain a high rating and score lower than this?
i suppose we need to put a minimum rating of 2000 on this, with flexible allowances for even higher ratings.
You should exclude opening book moves from the analysis.
One or two games provide fairly meaningless stats. Its like throwing two dice. You score a one and a two. You are now proclaimed Low Dice Throwing Champion... Not!
But if your average was just two after throwing ten or twenty dice, then the stats become much more significant, and you may well have a rightful claim to the Title.
Originally posted by GatecrasherI did the analysis on those two games. The matchup percentages don't include opening book moves (using the same database as I played the games with).
You should exclude opening book moves from the analysis.
One or two games provide fairly meaningless statis. Its like throwing two die. You score a one and a two. You are now proclaimed Low Dice Throwing Champion... Not!
But if your average was just two after throwing ten or twenty die, then the stats become much more significant, and you may well have a rightful claim to the Title.
Originally posted by GatecrasherI disagree. The Sicilian Dragon tends to lead to endgames where there are many moves that have no alternatives. Look at the arrakis games flexmore posted. Lots of moves where everything but the move played just obviously lose. This means a generally higher matchup than a game in a positional opening with various moves all being valid.
Then your opening choices wouldn't affect the match-up.
Another problem with you study, flexmore, is that you haven't defined very strong player. And let's say you did define it, at 2000 for example. Then your winner in almost definetely going to be lower than 2150. A much better study (though unreasonably time consuming) would be to analyse a statistically signifigant number of games for players between 1800-2500. Then determine a best fit equation to this data. From that, you can see who falls furthest below the equation.
Originally posted by XanthosNZThe vast majority of players who play the Dragon against me never get to an endgame so I wouldn't know.
I disagree. The Sicilian Dragon tends to lead to endgames where there are many moves that have no alternatives. Look at the arrakis games flexmore posted. Lots of moves where everything but the move played just obviously lose. This means a generally higher matchup than a game in a positional opening with various moves all being valid.
Originally posted by GatecrasherYou're probably right, but when someone gives me a three move mate I do give in to the dark side.
You shouldn't give in so easily. 😉
Game 1065458
Originally posted by no1marauderThanks for bringing that up No1.
You're probably right, but when someone gives me a three move mate I do give in to the dark side.
Game 1065458
Originally posted by no1marauderYea. I was kabitzing that game and wondered how Xant missed that. Put it down to a "bourbon" moment, for the moment.
You're probably right, but when someone gives me a three move mate I do give in to the dark side.
Game 1065458
skeeter