Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:48:45 10/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 09, 2000 at 11:08:28, Oliver Roese wrote: >On October 09, 2000 at 10:12:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 09, 2000 at 02:08:38, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On October 08, 2000 at 23:09:22, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On October 08, 2000 at 13:55:12, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 08, 2000 at 13:41:07, Oliver Roese wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 08, 2000 at 13:06:05, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On October 08, 2000 at 12:20:43, Oliver Roese wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On October 08, 2000 at 09:28:44, Mike S. wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Should programs be able, or be allowed, to move in *zero* seconds of thinking >>>>>>>>>time? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I don't think so (except when the pondering prepared for an opponent's move >>>>>>>>>which is actually played), but I'd like to hear what others, especially blitz >>>>>>>>>players or users who have programs play blitz/lightning at servers, think about >>>>>>>>>this. Is it fair, to make series of moves in zero seconds? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Probably, long sequences of very low quality moves in engine matches could be >>>>>>>>>avoided also, by forcing a minimum of 1 second (i.e. as a common standard in >>>>>>>>>computer chess programs). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>>>>M.Scheidl >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In opening and (very late) endgame computers act (almost) optimally. >>>>>>>>So surely nobody could say a competition in this case is "fair". >>>>>>>>Maybe "interesting" oder "challenging" for someone. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I tried to match some computer-accounts on fics with a 2-12 timecontrol. >>>>>>>>But almost all dont allow that (surprise, surprise;) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Oliver >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think that they will allow standard 2-15 or 20-20 time control when you have >>>>>>>better chances so I do not understand why do you need 2-12 time control unless >>>>>>>the target is to increase your blitz rating. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I do not like the fact that the players care about rating and I think they >>>>>>>should care only about the game they play and not about rating when it is clear >>>>>>>that the rating is clearly distorted(the fact that people can inflate their >>>>>>>rating prove that the rating is distorted). >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>>Sorry, but i have to take that as insulting, since you say i am acting not as a >>>>>>sportsman. I hope you regret your remark soon, so that we can continue to talk >>>>>>about computerchess, thank you. >>>>>> >>>>>>Oliver >>>>> >>>>>I apologize if I insulted you. >>>>> >>>>>I only wanted to say that 2 12 games against computers inflate the rating of >>>>>humans and avoiding 2 12 games against humans inflate the rating of computers. >>>>> >>>>>I wanted to say also that I do not like the fact that people can increase their >>>>>rating by these means. >>>>> >>>>>I think that if you are not interested in rating(I think they are meaningless >>>>>because of the distorted system) you can play standard time control games >>>>>against computers that are slightly slower than the 2 12 time control. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>> >>>>I disagree here. 2 12 is _not_ blitz chess by any measure of the game I have >>>>been playing for 40 years. 5 minute chess is blitz. I have a pretty tight >>>>formula for crafty to make blitz blitz. and standard standard. IM's play >>>>crafty all the time at 30 30 or whatever. This guy is more than welcome to >>>>do that. >>>> >>>>The most frequent reason for wanting to play a computer at 2 12 blitz is to >>>>cheat by using another program. 5 3 is doable by cheaters, but it is harder. >>>>but to play crafty, if someone wants a 12 sec increment, why not 10 12? Oh, >>>>that wouldn't affect their blitz rating... >>> >>>When I played regularly on the ICS (!), the normal blitz time control was 2 12. >>>I'm no longer active on any chess servers, and while I realise that what is >>>considered to be the normal time control has sped up over the years, I don't >>>think that offering a computer a match at 2 12 is a particular indication of >>>wanting to cheat. It sounds to me like it's an indication of wanting to have >>>enough time to (try to :-) have a good game without going really long. With >>>some time to think, you might be able to do something clever like build up a >>>long-range attack, instead of just getting hammered in a really quick game. >>> >> >>I am not sure about why 2 12 is wanted. If you can play 2 12, why not 6 14 >>and move it to standard, which almost _any_ computer will play on the servers. >>How different is 2 12 and 6 14? That is the point I don't understand. >> >If you dont understand something about me, feel free to ask me. >2 12 was only a suggestion. Sorry. That was a quick change of topic. my comment was about the fact that on all servers, 2 12 is (or was) the "default blitz time control". It doesn't feel like blitz to me, and I have personally played a _lot_ of blitz chess over the years (blitz = 5 mins per side for most any club you visit, although you will find many people playing even faster). 2 12 is a common 'signature' for a computer 'cheater'. The longer the increment, the easier it is to switch from the GUI, to the chess engine, and back again, without running out of time. That was my point. If you check on the servers, and you see someone that is winning maybe 1 of 4 games against 1800 humans at 5 0, but then suddenly they play a 2800 computer and win half of the games, using a time control of 2 12 or some such, you _know_ what is going on there. I was not accusing you of using a computer, and if I implied that, then I am certainly sorry for doing so. It was a general comment about 12 sec increments. GMs refuse to play those kinds of time controls because they _know_ their opponents will cheat. That is why 3 0 is so very common, except against _known_ computers. There many GMs prefer 5 3, which is why crafty always has an outstanding 5 3 seek. > > >>I don't consider 2 12 blitz. Nor does most of the 'strong' players I watch. >>Most GM players play more 3 0 and 5 0 than any other time control. Although >>most are also wise enough to play 5 3 vs the computer to avoid time scrambles >>that they always lose. >> >I understand your difficulty. >There is an anomaly in fics, considering 2 12 as blitz, which it is effectively >not is. >I dont enforce you, to play under conditions you dont like. Just tell me, what >you want. I don't really care. Crafty will _always_ play any standard time control game, up to at least 30 30 and sometimes 60 60. I think 6 12 is standard. I have played some blitz matches with GM Walter Browne at 5 14 (I == Crafty here) and that came up as 'blitz' (no, he didn't do very well even at 5 14, the last match was 4 games and he won one and lost three). I play most any time control on request. I simply try to avoid long inc games in blitz, because most of the time humans end up using a computer to help. At 5 3 it is much harder to cheat and win. > >> >> >> >>>To me, "standard" was always a serious rating -- you know, 60+ minutes per >>>player per game. Playing a computer 10 12 as standard sure doesn't fit my idea >>>of serious, and I doubt you'd want crafty to be tied up for a couple of hours at >>>a time. >>> >>>Dave >> >> >>Crafty will play 30 30 which is certainly going to be at least one hour per side >>per game. It has even played 60 60 in the past, but I cut that by 1/2 to avoid >>games that would take 5-6 hours. > > >Oliver
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.