Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: SSDF and the programmers............

Author: Detlef Pordzik

Date: 16:44:04 03/18/98

Go up one level in this thread


On March 18, 1998 at 04:38:38, Ed Schröder wrote:


>I fully agree with you. If things get honest again (engine versus
>engine)
>I will be happy to join the SSDF again. But let's face it, first we had
>to deal with book cooks, then the learners came and now we have to deal
>with an unknown autoplayer from a competitor?

Yes - this is right, let me say - the majority of it.....
you know it, I know it - and all of them people of the elder times :
what we now call book - cooking was named outbooking in them old times -
but, it
was more durable ( :-) ) - because of burnt EPROM's.
This has allways been there.....
because of lack of knowledge, how the learner actually works, I cannot
comment this - you must know better, if there are more possibilitiers
than just avoiding a loosing line, as a simple man'd suggest it to work.

>This for me is just the limit. Till now everybody has made his
>autoplayer public. Now we have a new fashion, a secret autoplayer.
>Who is next? Why should I join this new fashion?

Don't you do so, Ed !
For my opinion neather you, nor Marty, Richard, Johann, Mark, Stefan and
Robert
would need to join such a " new " - but leading into nowhere - " fashion
".
( Jesus - hopefully didn't forget one of them big names....)
This road'd be a dead end street - the basical quality of the progs is
far too
high + in the end you all'd ruin the effort of many years.
Because then there would be no more research on increase of the quality
of gameplay - but only the gasp for new horizons of tricks.....
I fairly doubt - as I know some of you, that the people themselves would
do it,
after all. It would just be the upcoming end - correct ??

>>do you see a chance, to get things back into balance, without SSDF
>>finally loosing it's face - and what would you personally suggest, how
>>this could work ?
>
>As I said before:
>
>- General accepted autoplayers also available for the public;
>- Equal hash table sizes;
>- Skip doubles;

Dull ELVIS could offer a solution on short range, where the " loosing
part " -
in this case, SSDF, would have a minimum of problems - comparing to the
state of art :
just start a new testing seria with F5 - book on HD - why not....leave
the brute
searcher it's 44 MB - why not....R9 + M7 can grab 60 MEGS without
problems - but
in difference to F5 they don't NEED such big tablebases on 40/120......
repeat all this on commercial available autoplayer - and then replace
the old result.
IF F5 is still on top, then, it's allright - if not - I don't
know...:-))
This would even leave CB the chance of not loosing their face ( totally
).
Not to forget Frans Morsch - who is really kicked by all this !

On longer range :
ONLY commercial available progs with the original engine.
Skip doubles.
Standard autoplayer.

Maybe I'm a dreamer.....but I see nothin' better ;
for the SSDF
for buisness
for the customer

>I do not share Ossie Weiner's opinions in the way he has expressed
>himself. I have no single evidence the chessbase autoplayer cheats.
>Neither do I expect that from a respected company. But I should have
>the chance to check that myself. It's called fair competition.

As I've posted before -
Ossi does his job - I think, you're one of the VERY last - not to know
this,   eh ?
What does KK allways post standardly ?
"....should be taken with a grain of salt...."
- make the load a little bigger - then you can swallow this, too :-))

>Sofar I noticed:
>
>#1. The chessbase autoplayer doesn't save the opponents game. Maybe
>opponents in that stage update their learner? Logical place no? And
>now maybe this learner update is bypassed? For Rebel8/9 this could
>be so true. I can't check. How can I judge?
>
>#2. The chessbase autoplayer changes colors. white-black-white and
>so on. This is not COMMON auto232. Looking at my source code this
>doesn't seem to influence the learner of Rebel. But how can I know
>for sure? And what about other chess programs? Did the Swedish ask
>the programmers if this white-black-white behavior influence their
>learners? One thing for sure, they didn't ask me. And from a
>programmers view of point this white-black-white behavior can easily
>disturb their learner.
>
>Quite a mess...

ELVIS ain't no programmer - I think, Robert wrote something interesting
about this.
Anyway - right in here ( without any elitary attitude ) - there are so
many
educated guys......names - older, newer - alot of them known for long
time in this buisness -
one should think about constructing an open letter ( why only Ossi....),
maybe
signed by 30 or 40 respectable people - so there'd be no chance to spot
it as a single sided commercial sight -
and then send it to Sweden......only a suggestion.

ELVIS



This page took 0.01 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.