New hopes for the team of Fritz 15 with the new member for its team Vasik G. Rajlich
"New author, new engine
Vasik Rajlich is new to the Fritz team. The American shook up the world of computer chess just a few years ago, reaching the top with his program, “Rybka”. He is the author of the new Fritz 15 engine, so there’s no question that it will be one of the world’s strongest!"
Vasik G. Rajlich,
a Czech-American (born 1971 in Cleveland, Ohio)
a Czech-American (born 1971 in Cleveland, Ohio)
For the new chess player that does no familiar with this giant of the chess engine developer; He was the creator of Rybka a very powerfull chess engine and winner of the top prizes back on 2007
History of Rybka 1.0 and beyond
2005
- Rybka 1.0 Beta is released Dec 5 as a free download, and after a week the "Rybka 1" series becomes available on a subscription basis. About 13 "beta" versions of Rybka 1.0.1 were released over the next few months. Rybka 1.0.1-Beta-(x)? competed (as Rybka beta) and won first place in Paderborn (December 27 2005) [13].
- The first commercial version, Rybka 1 end of 2005.
2006
- On June 10 (date from RybkaChess FAQ about Rybka 2.x), the MP-only Rybka 2.0 Beta is released. The date on various executables are Apr 23 (Beta 8) and May 17 (Beta 4).
- Rybka (under the name Rajlich) competed in the 2006 ICGA Chess Tournament [14]
- Rybka 2.1 was released Jul 26, 2006.
- Rybka 2.2 was released Nov 10, 2006.
- Rybka 2.2n2 was released Dec 14, 2006. All these dates are from the RybkaChess FAQ about Rybka 2.x (though that page seems to disappear every now and then).
2007
- Rybka 2.3 was released in late Feb 2007 (?). There was an "LK" version that had minor differences.
- A few more "2.3.1 beta" versions also appeared around this time (again including Kaufman's latest material imbalance numbers). The Rybka 2.3 evaluation function appears to retain the numerology from Rybka 1.0 Beta. Rybka 2.3.1 starts to make a few changes (due to Kaufman?) in the numbers, though keeping the structure largely intact.
- Rybka 2.3.2 was released Jun 13, 2007, and 2.3.2a about 5 days later.
Won ICGA Tournaments
- 15th World Computer Chess Championship - Amsterdam 2007 (ICGA Tournaments) » WCCC 2007
- 16th World Computer Chess Championship - Beijing 2008 (ICGA Tournaments) » WCCC 2008
- 17th World Computer Chess Championship - Pamplona 2009 (ICGA Tournaments) » WCCC 2009
- WCCC 2010 [15]
Here I will insert an interview made to Vasik ,notes from https://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/Vasik+Rajlich
Interview
Quotes from an uciengines.de Interview with Vasik Rajlich, December 20, 2005 [28], a new age in Computerchess? Two questions by Alexander Schmidt:
20. Alexander Schmidt:
The increase in playing strength of the latest chess engines is unbelieveable. We have since some time with Fruit 2.1 by Fabien Letouzey a very strong open source engine. Do you see a relation between the published sources of such a strong engine and the increase of strength in computer chess in general? How much influence do the ideas of Fruit have on the future of computerchess?
Vasik Rajlich:
Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.
It is a bit of a pity that Rybka won't make the same contribution to the computer chess community, but at the moment I must also think about protecting my secrets. It's the eternal struggle for a computer chess programmer.
21. Alexander Schmidt:
We had our first contact when I had questions about a similarity to Fruit in the search, others found similarities in the evaluation. Some people where a little bit suspicious that Rybka could be a clone of the open source engine. In the meantime it is clear that Rybka is no clone but you used ideas of Fruit (I guess all other serious engine programmers had a look at Fruit too). How strong would Rybka actually be if the Fruit code would have never been published?
Vasik Rajlich:
It's a good question. I don't want to get too specific about which ideas from Fruit I think are really useful, but they fall into two categories:
1) Very specific tricks, mostly related to search.
2) Philosophy of the engine (and in particular of the search).
Fruit could really hardly be more useful along both of these dimensions. Fabien is a very good engineer, and also has a very clear and simple conception of how his search should behave.
Anyway, if I really had to give a number - my wild guess is that Rybka would be 20 rating points weaker had Fruit not appeared.
20. Alexander Schmidt:
The increase in playing strength of the latest chess engines is unbelieveable. We have since some time with Fruit 2.1 by Fabien Letouzey a very strong open source engine. Do you see a relation between the published sources of such a strong engine and the increase of strength in computer chess in general? How much influence do the ideas of Fruit have on the future of computerchess?
Vasik Rajlich:
Yes, the publication of Fruit 2.1 was huge. Look at how many engines took a massive jump in its wake: Rybka, Hiarcs, Fritz, Zappa, Spike, List, and so on. I went through the Fruit 2.1 source code forwards and backwards and took many things.
It is a bit of a pity that Rybka won't make the same contribution to the computer chess community, but at the moment I must also think about protecting my secrets. It's the eternal struggle for a computer chess programmer.
21. Alexander Schmidt:
We had our first contact when I had questions about a similarity to Fruit in the search, others found similarities in the evaluation. Some people where a little bit suspicious that Rybka could be a clone of the open source engine. In the meantime it is clear that Rybka is no clone but you used ideas of Fruit (I guess all other serious engine programmers had a look at Fruit too). How strong would Rybka actually be if the Fruit code would have never been published?
Vasik Rajlich:
It's a good question. I don't want to get too specific about which ideas from Fruit I think are really useful, but they fall into two categories:
1) Very specific tricks, mostly related to search.
2) Philosophy of the engine (and in particular of the search).
Fruit could really hardly be more useful along both of these dimensions. Fabien is a very good engineer, and also has a very clear and simple conception of how his search should behave.
Anyway, if I really had to give a number - my wild guess is that Rybka would be 20 rating points weaker had Fruit not appeared.
In resume I dont blame his talent but i will ensure something that this guy will make fritz to go to the top 5 in the next 3 years from my date now
Links:
