Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: WMCCC - may the best man at getting the fastest hardware win :(

Author: Thorsten Czub

Date: 14:53:19 10/19/97

Go up one level in this thread


On October 19, 1997 at 16:19:55, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>After posting one response this morning, something kept gnawing at the
>back of my mind, "something is wrong here."  But I couldn't put my
>finger
>on it.  Later it hit me.  I went to DejaNews, and did a search on
>subjects
>with "NPS and match" in them.  And found the long thread where Ed and I
>were debating the importance of NPS.  Ed was on his "tactical
>sufficiency"
>bandwagon, and lo and behold, I found posts from Chris and Thorsten
>right
>in the middle, all saying the same thing.  NPS doesn't matter.

When I have program A on a pentium120 and the same program A on a
p2/200, and B beats A of course, what is to be said about this ??
That NPS is unimportant ?
That B is stronger than B ?

From my point of view NPS in unimportant. And we will show this with
CSTal.
And others show this with THEIR programs that will have less NPS than
yours.

I followed Chris threads here in CCC.

I think he is not right.

It doesn't matter which machines you have.
It does not help you in Den Haag , and it will not help much anyway.
In a few weeks or months AFTER Paris the opponent programs WOULD develop
strategies against YOUR programs IF your programs would be sold
somewhere.

It is easy to create ANTI-Ferret programs or ANTI-crafty programs, I
guess.
The only fact this does not happen (like it happens against all other
commercial programs Hiarcs, Mchess, Rebel, Genius, Fritz, CSTal etc.)
is:
Your programs do not compete anywhere !

This is - from my point of view - one main reason you are so impressed
by your NPS. Because you don't compete.
If you would compete, you would lose like all others lose.



>
>Now, suddenly, NPS does matter.  And I suppose I am confused as to what
>has
>really happened:
>
>1.  You didn't really believe any of the things you were saying in the
>NPS debate, but was really only saying them to keep the debate raging.


You are confused. Indeed.

>
>2.  You did believe the NPS argument (your side of it) but later changed
>your mind.


What is the sense of an olympic event when some american or german guys
are doped with anabolica or Dec Alpha hardware ?
It only proofs: not any female is really female. Some have a dongle,
where there should be no dongle. But thats dope.

>
>I don't see any other explanation.  In light of your comments on the NPS
>argument, and those of others, this alpha-issue seems to be a non-issue.
>*if* you believe what everyone but *me* was saying...
>
>
>Next topic...
>
>I don't know why Hiarcs withdrew.  I have an opinion.  If you want to
>hear
>it, here goes:
>
>  Hiarcs was withdrawn due to fear of losing.  It is currently on top of
>the SSDF list.  It is probably beginning to sell decently.  A disaster
>in
>Paris could reverse that quickly.  I strongly believe that any
>commercial
>program that chooses to avoid the WMCCC is doing so solely for
>commercial
>reasons.

I think you are wrong concerning Hiarcs. I don't like these: he is
feared or he is feared discussion. I have seen hiarcs and rebel and
mchess and others compete in many tournaments and championships. And
they did a good job. I have not seen crafty or ferret or other programs
there too. Were you afraid to lose ??


 I don't like to lose either.  However, there is one difference
>between the way I operate and the way the commercial programmers
>operate:
>
>Cray Blitz won the WCCC in 1983 and 1986.  By the time 1989 rolled
>around,
>however, I *knew* we wouldn't win again, unless there was some
>unprecedented
>luck involved, because of Deep Thought.  I had trouble finding machine
>time.
>I nearly decided to forget about it.  But after thinking about this, it
>didn't
>seem fair to Hsu and company, because if they won without Cray Blitz
>being
>there, they would have had to endure the "If CB had been there this
>would
>have been different."  I kept after Cray, they finally found a customer
>that would let us use their machine.  We did, DT won, and there was no
>doubt that they were best.  Contrast that to the commercial mind-set for
>a
>minute.  Do *everything* based on the bottom line of sales and public
>opinion.  They didn't go last year.  For the same reason they aren't
>going
>this year.  And it doesn't have a thing to do with new versions or
>anything
>else other than not wanting to take a chance.  Perhaps in another year
>this
>will be amateur only.  Doesn't matter to me...  I can think of a couple
>of
>amateur programs I fear more than any of the commercial programs already
>and this is going to get better (or worse depending on perspective.)
>
>So I don't believe for a minute that the "alpha issue" ran Hiarcs off,
>nor
>kept Genius away, nor Rebel, nor any other program.  I think it is a
>matter
>of "fear" more than anything else.


I don't think Mark is feared to lose, nor do I think Ed is afraid or
Marty or somebody else. I can only laugh about your statement.
maybe you are afraid, but I don't believe Mark would be afraid to play
against Ferret or crafty. In fact hiarcs played against ferret once ...


>Unfortunate, because I am just as
>afraid
>of doing badly as anyone else.  But *not* so afraid that I won't play.

And this is right for all the other you call feared.


>If
>Crafty loses every game, I'll get to enjoy a year of razzing.   But it
>will
>at least be there.  I'm willing to put my money where my mouth is...

The money question was not the reason for mark, and not your
fear-claims.



This page took 0.03 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.