Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: SSDF rating list soon history?

Author: Howard Exner

Date: 12:37:39 05/04/98

Go up one level in this thread


On May 04, 1998 at 11:22:28, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:

>4 - The fact that ChessBase can tune their engines and books against the
>opposition without allowing the other programmers to do the same, gives
>ChessBase an obvious advantage.

>Point 4) is, I think, the troublemaker, the only real one. I see two
>ways to solve it:
>a - ChessBase releases the autoplayer Fritz 5.
>b - Other programmers follow the example and release auto232 versions
>only for the SSDF.

How would point b work? If Fritz says only use my autoplayer and
Genius says only use my autoplayer they would never play each other.
I can't see how other programs can follow the Fritz requirement as
no testing could be done. It has to be a universal autoplayer that all
agree to. Why didn't Fritz use the standard autoplayer? Is the reasoning
that other programs will autotest and find weaknesses? So what, since
Fritz could then again improve its program in the next generation. In a
sense
it could thank the other programmers for finding and exploiting the
weaknesses
and in turn become even better.
>
>I think a) is a much better option because not only solves the problem,
>but it allows all of us to autoplay all programs. Nevertheless, once
>manufacturers made a point it seems metaphysically impossible for them
>to modify it. I don't know if this is a reflection of the secretive,
>pathologically untrusting ways of the chess computer world, but one
>thing is for sure: the SSDF may very well end up being the victim of all
>this. Meanwhile, everybody seems to wait for everybody else's move.
>Wait, do nothing and let the SSDF go into deep trouble.



This page took 0 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.