Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 19:00:42 09/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 2005 at 18:08:23, Dann Corbit wrote: >On September 09, 2005 at 18:04:35, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On September 09, 2005 at 17:50:58, Mig Greengard wrote: >> >>>I'm not a ChessBase employee, loyal or otherwise. >>> >>>ChessBase not being attacked? I guess you are new to these boards. You should >>>look through the archives for the comments about ChessBase's lack of coverage of >>>the WCCC. Saying I'm defending them or making excuses presupposes there is >>>something for them to be ashamed of or worried about. >>> >>>I said an 11-round tournament was no more definitive than human chess. But since >>>playing dozens and hundreds of games between computers is both practical and >>>common, unlike with humans, yes, there is a higher standard for agreeing on >>>legitimacy of strength. Or would you be happy if the computer rating list >>>required just a dozen games? Running around and shouting the king is dead when >>>Shredder and Junior don't win is just as sensible as declaring Arkady Naiditsch >>>world champion because he won Dortmund. > >How about: Khalifman, A. >Best player in the world in 1999? >http://www.mark-weeks.com/chess/9899$wix.htm > >>>It was a great result, a deserved win, >>>and should be praised and enjoyed for what it is. It's also symbolic to a >>>certain degree, mostly because Fruit is open source. Strong new engines have >>>almost always been amateur. >> >>You are right about the reliability of a short event like this. >>However, the contest is sponsored by the official sanctioning body for computer >>chess and is every bit as much a world championship as a FIDE event (the best >>man does not always win those either). >> >>Now, as for a reliable reference to which program is strongest, the SSDF is far >>more sensible. But in the same manner with FIDE, we do not choose the world >>champion just due to their Elo score (though that method would actually be as >>good as any, I imagine). We have to have some formal contest to win. It is the >>same with computer chess. >> >>>I was surprised that ChessBase didn't cover the event and tried to explain >>>several possible rationales, both for not playing and for not covering it. I >>>think they should have covered it, obviously. If not daily, at least the result. ChessBase ad copy on the software boxes: ----------------------------------------------------- "Shredder 7: Many-time world computer chess champion For computer chess experts Shredder is the number one choice. Nobody can ignore four computer chess world championship titles won at Jakarta 1996, Paderborn 1999, London 2000 and Maastricht 2001. So in this box you have the reigning blitz world champion, ready to play and analyze with you. The world champion chess program "Shredder 7" for single and multi-processor systems. You can configure the "engine" - the module that calculates chess move - and change the program parameters to actually improve the performance in practical games." ... "Shredder's world championship titles: Jararta 1996: World micro-computer chess champion * Paderborn 1999: Computer chess world champion! * London 2000: World micro-computer chess champion * Maastricht 2001: World micro-computer chess champion * Maastricht 2002: blitz world champion" ----------------------------------------------------- "Juniot 8: DOUBLE WORLD CHAMPION This chess program, written by the Israelis Amir Ban and Shay Bushinsky, has achieved everything it could wish for. Junior won the Computer Chess World Championship in 2001 and 2002, and it can look back on a string of successes against human beings in tournaments and matches..." ----------------------------------------------------- So it is pretty clear that at one time, ChessBase did not view the world championship as just another insignificant tournament. One additional point -- The GUI and engines are developed completely separately. There is no mutual exclusion on where energies can be devoted. In fact, I imagine that the engine developers have nothing at all to do with the interface development and that the interface developers have nothing at all to do with the engine development. But, as usual, IMO-YMMV.
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.