Author: Omid David Tabibi
Date: 09:30:13 07/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2004 at 12:19:46, Sean Empey wrote: >On July 14, 2004 at 12:11:31, Omid David Tabibi wrote: > >>On July 14, 2004 at 12:06:35, José Carlos wrote: >> >>>On July 14, 2004 at 11:41:04, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>> >>>>On July 14, 2004 at 11:38:31, Peter Berger wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 11:26:47, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 11:12:14, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Not at all, Omid >>>>>>>If you already have a parallel engine you should run it into a hardware capable >>>>>>>of getting all its power. >>>>>> >>>>>>I understand that you are going to provide the hardware, right? >>>>>> >>>>>>It is not something personal; next year I will have the needed hardware, but >>>>>>what about others? Deep Sjeng and ParSOS were also parallel engines, but ran on >>>>>>single processor not because they thought it was better, but because they did >>>>>>not have access to a fast multiprocessor machine. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I wonder what except the results changed from two weeks ago to now to make you >>>>>imply this is an unfair event and go on raving about it ?! >>>>> >>>>>Weren't you even one of the organizers? >>>> >>>>Yes, and I complained loudly about it even before the event. >>> >>> It doesn't make sense to organize something you complain about. Either ask >>>_before_ that it is a WMCCC this year or don't organize something you're >>>against. >> >>I'm glad that we organized it, and am very happy that it took place >>successfully. >> >>I'm of course not against it, but simply say that there is room for >>improvement. > >Yes, but it's not making it easier for _you_ to win. It's marketing it better >and getting more participation. For this very reason a uniform hardware rule should be adopted. The number of participants would be much higher in a uniform hardware event, and you can expect other strong single processor engines (like Hiarcs and Tiger) to join. > > >> >> >>> Your problem is that you said here that Falcon only loses consistently to >>>Shredder and now you need an excuse. But you needn't, actually. Just accept WCCC >>>is not a measure of strength but just a party for programmers and teams and try >>>to prove your strength in more scientifically tests like SSDF. >>> >>> José C. >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>>The multi-processor entries got the first 5 places in the tournament - this was >>>>>partly unexpected by some, probably including you. Had you been aware of it >>>>>before the event you probably would have tried to get better hardware in case >>>>>your engine can use it successfully. Every other answer is a bit hard to believe >>>>>for me. >>>>> >>>>>Peter
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.