Author: CLiebert
Date: 01:02:15 07/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2001 at 13:19:10, Dann Corbit wrote: >On July 18, 2001 at 06:03:30, CLiebert wrote: > >>Posted by Dann Corbit (Profile) on July 17, 2001 at 04:15:06: >> >>In Reply to: Re: does chessbase care about wb engines posted by CLiebert on July >>17, 2001 at 04:02:44: >> >> >>On July 17, 2001 at 04:02:44, CLiebert wrote: >> >>>On July 16, 2001 at 17:30:43, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On July 16, 2001 at 06:35:07, CLiebert wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 16, 2001 at 02:26:53, ERIQ wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>maybe the problem w/ chessbase interface and wb engines is that, bigbrother does >>>>>>not care about them performing at their best. >>>>>> >>>>>>Why should they ?! wb engines are free, they don't make money from them but they >>>>>>compete strongly w/ fritz,nimzo, etc. their *bread and butter* products. >>>>>> >>>>>>So if wb-engines somehow get dumbed down alittle great. I guess that justifys >>>>>>the price of "pro" engines. >>>>>> >>>>>> sign, >>>>>> Eriq >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>First: Why do you think CB put efforts in developing the adapter? >>>> >>>>To make lots and lots of money, I would suppose. That's generally the purpose >>>>of writing code for commercial endeavors. Sometimes, they might do something >>>>just to be nice. Is that why CB wrote their adaptor? >>>> >>>>>Second: there are a lots of engines showing no difference in playing strenght. >>>>>If programmers a willing and able to optmize their engines for fritz they could >>>>>do this. Borgstädt did it for Goliath, Kai Skibbe for gromit, other examples are >>>>>Anmon, Faile or TCB. The Natives and wb-adapter-versions of these engines are >>>>>quite at the same level in pratice, did you try one of them? >>>> >>>>Let's see... >>>>5/(100+) seems to be a rather small ratio. >>>>I am curious to know why the existing, well-debugged Winboard protocol was not >>>>adopted as-is. And even more interesting would be to know why CB protocol must >>>>send resets every so often. Is there some purpose to this? This defect has >>>>been known for many years. Finally it was fixed recently and then immediately >>>>re-broken. Seems a bit odd on the surface. >>>> >>>>>But if you like to hold on you big brother theories, feel free ... >>>> >>>>I don't know if it is sinister or not, but I am _personally_ convinced that the >>>>defects in the CB version of the Winboard adapter are purposeful, just as the >>>>defects in the RS232 adapter were also purposeful. I am not sure if I can >>>>actually blame a company for trying to make their products look good at the >>>>expense of competitors, especially if the competition is free. >>> >>>You´re joking?! >>> >>>Why do you think CB gave the native-code to three of the best wb-programmers >>>(gromit, sos and goliath) before if they fear the competition? >> >>It's called "slave labor" >>1. I give you this specification. >> >>If you would like... >> >>2. You code to that specification. >> >>Of course. To the native concept, to uci and / or winboard... >> >>3. The output will be useless to anyone except for us. >> >>Wrong! >>If people could use an engine with one of the most popular GUIs it is useful >>for chessbase (of course), for the engine-programmer and for the users. >>I believe Gandalf would be happy getting the native code and rights. >>Why do think people were so enthusiastic getting The King working under fritz? >>They could use the GUIs of chessmaster or winboard, couldn´t they? > >The engines that are produced run only under ChessBase. >It is true that people like to be able to run all of their favorite engines in >one place. I certainly don't disagree with that. I am glad that ChessMaster >has taken an open stance and allowed their engine to run under multiple GUI's. >Yet another reason that the ChessMaster software will continue to dominate. >They can figure out what people want and then try to do it. > >>As a result of your work, other people will be able to use your engines with CB. >> >> >>And the other way round! > >How do I run a CB engine under Winboard? > >>>For what reason should cb fear the competition of wb-engines? >> >>It isn't easy to compete with "free" -- you have to have significant value >>added. I think that CB does add significant value, but it is hard to >>communicate. >> >>Of course it is an significant value for the freak-scene, but not for the mass >>market. Chessmaster was (is?) the most sold chessprogramm worldwide with only >>one engine, so why do think it is so important from the commercial point of view >>to support wb-engines (beside 20 natives!) ? > >Because once people figure it out, they will want to do it. Because the mass >market is completely gobbled up by ChessMaster and nobody else has any chance to >get even a fraction of their display space in the mass market. Therefore, they >should do their best to appeal to chess freaks. Because the ChessBase products >are quite a bit more expensive than ChessMaster (which can be had for well under >$20!) and therefore must add significant value to the purchase. Becase a chess >tool vendor must anticipate future trends. Do you imagine that the 100+ >Winboard engines are not going to eventually capture some attention? > >>People see SSDF results and make purchase decisions based on that. >> People see WMCCC results and make purchase decisions based on that. It's silly >>-- they ought to look at useful features. But it is obvious that they don't >>really know what they want or need very well. >> >> >>That might be right or not. A lots of people buying a product watching the cover >>in the software-market. If there is anything like "Worldchampion" or >>"Rankinglist No1" they might opt for this one. What else should they do, not >>everbody is an insider. >>Making research to find out that fritz or shredder have the best GUI before >>buying a "simple computer game"? Behaving like this is not the majority, I >>guess. > >I think you are right about that. There are (however) an educated crowd that >looks at features. A real database system like that offered by ChessBase and >Chess Assistant is really light years beyond the competition for serious chess >players needs. However, it is hard to get that information to the chess playing >public. And it is even harder to show people how they might benefit without >them actually seeing the product in use. > >They walk into a specialty store and see a dozen chess programs. >They all have nice, shiny boxes. All of them say that they are the best. >Most people will just buy the cheapest one. > >> >>>What do think happens if a wb-engines reaches a tiger-or-fritz-level? >> >>They already have. >> >> >>Do you really believe that any wb-engine can compete with tiger/fritz on the >>long run?! > >I believe that the difference is so miniscule that in play or coaching 99.9999% >of the people who buy chess programs could not tell if they were playing against >crafty or fritz or chess tiger unless someone told them. All they would know is >that the chess engine clobbers them or that the chess engine can suggest much >better moves than they can come up with by themselves. > >Probably, Chess Tiger and Junior and Fritz are 100 ELO above Yace and Crafty. I >am guessing that half of that is opening book, but maybe that is an >exaggeration. Anyway, that difference is inconsequential to the one who >purchases the program. I also think that crafty could be configured on a 64 CPU >machine in such a way that it would dominate any other chess engine on the >planet. Of course, that has no commercial significance. > >>Show me a win of an amateur-engine over a long distance match against >>tiger, level doesn´t matter. I am shure you can´t! > >I can't. But I can show you a lot of wins by crafty against any top engine. >And Yace. > >>>Do you think you will get it for free? >>>Yes? ;-) >> >>Crafty and Yace pretty well match that description. >> >> >>I disagree (did you ever try Tiger?). > >Yes. I have the commercial engines: >Chess Tiger >Zarkhov >Rebel >Hiarcs >and I like them all. >I also have Bookup and Chess Assistant. >I don't have ChessBase because the ChessBase programs are unable to process EPD >records. I do recognize the general excellence of the ChessBase programs. I >especially admire Junior and Fritz as excellent work, and I like some of the >features of the ChessBase database. However, for my needs, Chess Assistant is >much better. > >>Of course they are quite good and I like them very much (as some others too), >> but it is still a long way to compete the top! >>The latest Yace seems to be much stronger, thats a great progress, yes! >>Same with gromit 382 or GL2. Crafty remains for nearly a year at the same level. > >18.10 is a big jump forward, I think. > >>Tiger made a great jump (away from the amateurs!) with its last version, >>and fritz7 will go further again, so am shure that the >> difference between amateurs and profs is getting bigger not smaller in the >>near future! > >It will stay about 100 ELO for all eternity, I think. > >>>You get Crafty for free. As native. Another one of the strongest >>>winboard-engines you get for free too. As native! >>>A few days ago CB agreed to publish the GL 1.5 engine as fritz-native. >>> >>>You will know how it suits to these bigbrother-theories, I am sure >>>(and won´t discuss this stuff anymore). >> >>This is all very interesting, but you didn't bother to answer any of my >>questions. >> >>It is not very interesting for endusers to go into technical details. >>It might be interesting in theory and for programmers, of course! >>For endusers it makes no difference if it works "good" or "perfect", >>if playing works without remarkable problems. > >Why don't you fix the bug? >Just comment out the line that sends the reset. It adds no value and causes >problems for the free engines. >Better yet, just dump your whole spec and use the Winboard specification. You're >falling behind anyway, because there is a new Winboard specification with a lot >of improvements. > >>Whether an wb-engine plays with 97% or 100% performance, with 30 Elo more or >>less under fritz is not important for the majority. > >Sending resets is a 50% performance loss, since it clears the hash tables. > >>If somebody would like to play with the best engines he wouldn´t opt for >>wb-engines. > >You are wrong, mathematically. >1. I am somebody. >2. I like to play with the best engines >3. I opt for Winboard engines and enjoy them very much >q.e.d. Brilliant rethorik, nice ;-))) >>Different style is the most important thing of the wb-engines for me, not 20 or >>30 elo more or less under different GUIs, you can´t feel it anyway. > >Different style is important. There are (for instance) positions that only >Phalanx can solve. But when you harm the performance of the engines to the tune >of 50% for no reason, it looks like fear. Maybe it isn't but it sure smells >bad. Of course. And you will find a lot more example where tiger/Fritz/shredder solving positions and phalanx fails. >>>>It is well known (and incredibly obvious) that sending a reset command during >>>>play will not make for optimium performance. Can anyone provide a logical >>>>explanation as to why this command is still sent by these tools? Has there been insufficient time to remove this clear and obvious defect >>>>? >>> >>>Where is the point in practice if you compare GL and LG/Winboard or other >>>engines I mentioned below wihout any difference after hundreds of games in >>>practice? >> >>If someone spends a great deal of energy working around the bugs in the >>protocol, they can produce an engine which has value only to an owner of CB. >> >>You ´re talking about things you don´t know. >>I know Borgstädt for years and can tell you that he did not spend >>that "great deal of energy" in working around the protocol what you think! >>He did it "by the way" and it wasn´t very difficult for him. >>Ok, may be he is in a way like a professional, for real amateurs it >>might not be the best solution. > >You have to write code to work around the bugs in the protocol. I am sure it >took him at least 3-4 days and probably more like a week. At the cost of a >professional programmer, that is a good deal of money. > >>So far I would agree and I would be very happy too, if Cb will improve this. > >I think you will gain a lot of goodwill by fixing it. "YOU" ??? I am CSS not chessbase, it isn´t my task! Regards Christian
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.