Author: Peter Berger
Date: 05:45:48 09/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 14, 2000 at 08:10:03, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On September 14, 2000 at 07:55:40, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On September 14, 2000 at 06:44:13, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>On September 14, 2000 at 05:13:14, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On September 14, 2000 at 02:57:09, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 14, 2000 at 02:17:58, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>>[snip] >>>>>>IMO every game played in WCCC events is worth at least 10 autoplayer >>>>>>games. Authors are present to solve any problem that might occur, no >>>>>>book randomness, no learning involved, book preparation should ensure >>>>>>that the author's program should play those lines the program likes >>>>>>best. >>>> >>>> >>>>>Barring some errant codes sent by Winboard [as is alledged for some >>>>>autoplayers], I disagree completely. >>>> >>>>Then have a look at the last 3-5 WCCC's. If you look at the rankings >>>>they don't match with for instance the SSDF list. Especially Shredder >>>>comes to mind. >>> >>>That doesn't mean much. You can't expect the same results after 21 games (WCCC x >>>3) or after 500+ games. Not even similar, probably. The contrary would be a >>>surprise. >>> >>>Enrique >> >>The point is that you cannot expect the same result because the conditions are >>different and not because the number of games. > >The number of games is essential if you care for accurate results. > >>Different opening preperation against different opponents is important in WCCC >>when it cannot help in the ssdf. > >That's also an element to consider, and it makes the SSDF list even more >reliable if what you care for is the engine. > >Enrique > >>Uri I think the difference between SSDF and WCCC is just the same as between the Olympic Games and the annual ranking lists most sports have . Olympic Games and WCCC are about being there at THE moment , preparing for a long time , tuning your body/engine to the extreme , doing everything to win the event and at last you'll also need a little luck ( but I think this is a minor thing ) . If you get injured one week before the Olympic Games you are out for the next 4 years . If you in your last minutes efforts introduced a deadly bug in your chess engine you are out too , same as when falling into an opening trap or your machine being heavily overclocked produces unreliable results . It's sports in fact . And like in other big sports events it simply doesn't matter if you had been the best 4 weeks later after some major improvements or if you had bad luck or whatsoever . In the SSDF programs are not run by the programmer or his/her operator and are in no way specially tuned . They play a huge number of games which sounds great but they simply don't answer the same question a WCCC tries to answer . Also I tend to take their results with a grain of salt simply because of some things posted by the operators here . Like : Junior 5 didn't work properly on one computer so I decided to let Junior 5 play on the other computer and use the Junior 6 book instead. I won't continue with other things I remember because it doesn't matter ; in general I think they do a very good job and do the best they can . SSDF seems to give the more reliable results but still when it is about competition I think WCCC is the real thing . A matter of taste . And it seems some programs follow more the Olympic spirit . The luck Shredder must have had winning without being the best grows and grows after every event ;)
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.