Author: Shep
Date: 02:10:46 06/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 1999 at 17:42:03, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >>I will not make a final decision about these issues (Tiger 11.5 in/out, Rebel >>10a/10d, CM6000/MCP8) until the starting date anyway (this will be sometime >>during the week starting on June 21st). >> > >I personally think you should include CM6000 regardless of what your match >between MCP8 and CM6000 reveal. In fact, they probably both belong in your >tournament. I also feel it isn't right to have the two Chess Tiger programs >because that isn't fair to the others - except for Chessmaster because your I want to have the strongest programs in, regardless of how "fair" this seems in absolute numbers. If the top 5 programs were Rebel 6 to 10, I would have all of them in. Remember this is not W(M)CCC where - technically - not the programs are the participants but their programmers, and each programmer may only bring one program. I've had many tournaments where up to 4 versions of one program participated. >version is not comercially available and is your own modification of an older >CM5500. Chessmaster 6000 is rated quite highly by the SSDF. Is their rating Actually, "CM 5555" _is_ commercially available, you just have to buy CM 5500 and adjust the personality settings as described on my site. There are no further modifications beside that. >system so bad and CM6000 that bad as well? I think a lot of us would like to >know how CM6000 would do in your tournament regardless if MCP8 wins the >qualifier. Put them both in and take out one Tiger. You intend to have Rebel 10 >and both Tigers. Isn't Ed Schroeder associated with all of them? Is it right to >have 3 programs from Ed? I believe the credibility of your tournament will be "Associated" is a very loose term. In this sense, Chessbase is "associated" with Junior, Hiarcs, Nimzo, ... Tiger is the work of Christophe Theron; the fact that he cooperates with Ed and that Tiger will be some sort of "Rebel add-on" or "engine" does not mean it's Ed's program now. :) >hurt some if you don't include CM6000. By the way, you should know I don't own Let's put it that way: if CM loses the qualifier series against MChess, it has accumulated enough below-average results that it would not be fair if I still included it. Because then for the same reason you could ask why Zarkov and WChess are not in. That's my idea of "fairness": If I have a principle of not including programs which had suboptimal results in my tests, I make no exceptions. The qualifier against MChess is already a courtesy act out of respect for the opinion of those of you here on CCC who have pressed me to give CM 6000 a second chance. If it fails there, there will be no third. BTW, first game was a draw yesterday. --- Shep
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.