Author: Brian Kostick
Date: 19:48:59 03/05/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 05, 2001 at 16:08:48, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >On March 04, 2001 at 11:51:18, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On March 04, 2001 at 10:36:15, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >> >>>Die B.27 ist okay, unterscheidet sich kaum von der Paderborn-Version. >>>Gruss, Uli >> >> >>brilliant. i ask because i don't want that anybody feels disadvantaged. >>if anybody thinks he has a better version he is allowed to upgrade >>between the rounds. > > >And that's completely rubbish. If you update engines between rounds, what use is >the outcome of such a tournament? There is no consistency in this tourney! An >updated engine is a DIFFERENT engine, so you might as well not call it a tourney >but a set of engine matches. Hell, you might even start such a "tourney" with >Fritz 1 and end up with Fritz 7 ... and what would this say about Fritz's >playing strength? He started weak but ended up the winner nontheless? Har har. >In my opinon, the engine version that started the tournament should be the very >engine that ends it. No changing of horses in midstream or else the results get >worthless! > >Imagine Linares ... Kasparov gets bored in midtourney and gets exchanges by >Kramnik ... Shirov does not play to good, so he sends in his brother (does he >have one?) ... but that would not be a tourney anymore. Just like your Odyssee >with updated engines is no tourney in my opinion. > >Just my $0.02. > >Any comments? > >Andreas > > > >www.andreas-schwartmann.de I think I understand your point. I also note that some are objecting, finding no fault with changes between rounds. For an example let's say I am to tout Nimzo. Now I may want several tuned books, anti-Fritz, anti-Crafty, anti-Whatever. Also I can tuned Nimzo engines parameters, if fact use several versions of Nimzo. (99, 2000, 7.32, 8, ect...) Its author may even go so far as to change code and recompile between rounds? After all this it's fair play? No one objects? Obviously some DO object. Not to how an individual host a tournament, but to how the results maybe presented. All these changes designed to selectively defeat opponents and claim the glory (customer base, money, rating, pride, ect...)? I personally would find it a warped glory if it was not the identical product that I released for public consumption. IMO, such between round changes make for warped and useless results except to maybe some engine authors or a few select others. Definitely not what many of us expect when we look at tournament results and try to form some impression or conclusion. Regards, Brian K.
This page took 0.02 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.