Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:59:09 10/19/97
Go up one level in this thread
On October 19, 1997 at 17:53:19, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On October 19, 1997 at 16:19:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>After posting one response this morning, something kept gnawing at the >>back of my mind, "something is wrong here." But I couldn't put my >>finger >>on it. Later it hit me. I went to DejaNews, and did a search on >>subjects >>with "NPS and match" in them. And found the long thread where Ed and I >>were debating the importance of NPS. Ed was on his "tactical >>sufficiency" >>bandwagon, and lo and behold, I found posts from Chris and Thorsten >>right >>in the middle, all saying the same thing. NPS doesn't matter. > >When I have program A on a pentium120 and the same program A on a >p2/200, and B beats A of course, what is to be said about this ?? >That NPS is unimportant ? >That B is stronger than B ? > >From my point of view NPS in unimportant. And we will show this with >CSTal. >And others show this with THEIR programs that will have less NPS than >yours. > >I followed Chris threads here in CCC. > >I think he is not right. > >It doesn't matter which machines you have. >It does not help you in Den Haag , and it will not help much anyway. >In a few weeks or months AFTER Paris the opponent programs WOULD develop >strategies against YOUR programs IF your programs would be sold >somewhere. > my program is "sold" *everywhere*. To this date in time, there have over 170,000 *different* host machines that have downloaded one or more copies/ versions of crafty. That's 170,000 different people at least, and quite likely more since many use some pretty common ISP's... >It is easy to create ANTI-Ferret programs or ANTI-crafty programs, I >guess. >The only fact this does not happen (like it happens against all other >commercial programs Hiarcs, Mchess, Rebel, Genius, Fritz, CSTal etc.) >is: >Your programs do not compete anywhere ! You should re-state this. I competed at Jakarta last year, will be at Paris this year, and played in at least two good human events this last year, winning the Pan Am, and playing in a round robin with 5 GM players... Maybe I don't compete where *you* compete. But I do compete. I have played more games on the chess servers than all the commercial program added together and multiplied by 10X. So I'm pretty visible, and I know how I (crafty) plays. > >This is - from my point of view - one main reason you are so impressed >by your NPS. Because you don't compete. >If you would compete, you would lose like all others lose. Care to lets post a list of opponents and number of games played over this past year? I'd start with over 150 games against GM Larry Christiansen. Plus Shabalov, Shirov, Karpov, Ivanov, Roman, Shaked, and a dozen other GM's I have forgotten... > > > >> >>Now, suddenly, NPS does matter. And I suppose I am confused as to what >>has >>really happened: >> >>1. You didn't really believe any of the things you were saying in the >>NPS debate, but was really only saying them to keep the debate raging. > > >You are confused. Indeed. > >> >>2. You did believe the NPS argument (your side of it) but later changed >>your mind. > > >What is the sense of an olympic event when some american or german guys >are doped with anabolica or Dec Alpha hardware ? >It only proofs: not any female is really female. Some have a dongle, >where there should be no dongle. But thats dope. > >> >>I don't see any other explanation. In light of your comments on the NPS >>argument, and those of others, this alpha-issue seems to be a non-issue. >>*if* you believe what everyone but *me* was saying... >> >> >>Next topic... >> >>I don't know why Hiarcs withdrew. I have an opinion. If you want to >>hear >>it, here goes: >> >> Hiarcs was withdrawn due to fear of losing. It is currently on top of >>the SSDF list. It is probably beginning to sell decently. A disaster >>in >>Paris could reverse that quickly. I strongly believe that any >>commercial >>program that chooses to avoid the WMCCC is doing so solely for >>commercial >>reasons. > >I think you are wrong concerning Hiarcs. I don't like these: he is >feared or he is feared discussion. I have seen hiarcs and rebel and >mchess and others compete in many tournaments and championships. And >they did a good job. I have not seen crafty or ferret or other programs >there too. Were you afraid to lose ?? kind of hard for us to compete. The programs didn't exist. Crafty is not yet three years old. Bruce is a little older, but only maybe a year or so. So that question is pretty stupid. But *I* have competed with a computer chess program for almost 30 years now. I *never* ran and hid. *never*... > > > I don't like to lose either. However, there is one difference >>between the way I operate and the way the commercial programmers >>operate: >> >>Cray Blitz won the WCCC in 1983 and 1986. By the time 1989 rolled >>around, >>however, I *knew* we wouldn't win again, unless there was some >>unprecedented >>luck involved, because of Deep Thought. I had trouble finding machine >>time. >>I nearly decided to forget about it. But after thinking about this, it >>didn't >>seem fair to Hsu and company, because if they won without Cray Blitz >>being >>there, they would have had to endure the "If CB had been there this >>would >>have been different." I kept after Cray, they finally found a customer >>that would let us use their machine. We did, DT won, and there was no >>doubt that they were best. Contrast that to the commercial mind-set for >>a >>minute. Do *everything* based on the bottom line of sales and public >>opinion. They didn't go last year. For the same reason they aren't >>going >>this year. And it doesn't have a thing to do with new versions or >>anything >>else other than not wanting to take a chance. Perhaps in another year >>this >>will be amateur only. Doesn't matter to me... I can think of a couple >>of >>amateur programs I fear more than any of the commercial programs already >>and this is going to get better (or worse depending on perspective.) >> >>So I don't believe for a minute that the "alpha issue" ran Hiarcs off, >>nor >>kept Genius away, nor Rebel, nor any other program. I think it is a >>matter >>of "fear" more than anything else. > > >I don't think Mark is feared to lose, nor do I think Ed is afraid or >Marty or somebody else. I can only laugh about your statement. >maybe you are afraid, but I don't believe Mark would be afraid to play >against Ferret or crafty. In fact hiarcs played against ferret once ... > and against crafty many times. I'd be happy to post the results if you'd like to see them. They are probably not quite what you are expecting however. > >>Unfortunate, because I am just as >>afraid >>of doing badly as anyone else. But *not* so afraid that I won't play. > >And this is right for all the other you call feared. > hmmm... then *where are they?*??? > >>If >>Crafty loses every game, I'll get to enjoy a year of razzing. But it >>will >>at least be there. I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is... > >The money question was not the reason for mark, and not your >fear-claims. right... and not for Richard... and not for Ed, even though he explicitly stated that he was afraid of these events because amateurs cooked his book. I use a different book for tournaments than I do for casual play. I'll keep my opinion for the present...
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.