Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Unfair play by chessbase and tiger at auto232 player

Author: Ed Schröder

Date: 07:41:14 03/27/01

Go up one level in this thread


On March 27, 2001 at 08:14:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On March 27, 2001 at 00:06:53, Ed Schröder wrote:
>
>Let's try again Ed.
>
>If you design a window with a checkbox which by default is
>unmarked mentionning in a very very small font
>  "kill me if this checkbox is unchecked".
>
>Then majority of users will click Ok and risk getting
>killed a second later. Actually they take the risk without
>wanting.
>
>People always just click 'ok'. They don't read what is on the
>screen. Only a small group of hackers like you and me and some other
>CCC readers are reading the screen very carefully.

Your example is not real and is spelled exaggerating.

Ed



>>On March 26, 2001 at 21:39:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On March 26, 2001 at 17:10:56, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>
>>>>On March 26, 2001 at 13:56:06, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hello People,
>>>>>
>>>>>Why design a protocol for auto232 player?
>>>>>
>>>>>That is the basic question.
>>>>>
>>>>>My interpretation is that this protocol needs to
>>>>>be followed to play games at the auto232 player then.
>>>>>
>>>>>The protocol as designed by Chrilly and Stefan is
>>>>>having a number of commands.
>>>>>
>>>>>The most important is that one is called 'slave' and the
>>>>>other is 'master'. Now being master says shit about whether
>>>>>you play better chess, but it says something about what
>>>>>your function is within the protocol.
>>>>>
>>>>>If you are master, then your function is to start the game
>>>>>and afterwards ship your opponent the command to save the game.
>>>>>
>>>>>Let's first discuss the chesspartner interface which is used for
>>>>>Gambit Tiger. Gambit Tiger is giving very little problems on the
>>>>>auto232 player, let's start mentionning that. It doesn't have
>>>>>big demands to play a game. It's happy very soon. No need to
>>>>>have a machine with zillions of megabytes of RAM, no need to
>>>>>have 7.5 GB of EGTBs on the harddisk before it start playing.
>>>>>
>>>>>It plays no problems there.
>>>>>
>>>>>however, WHY does it have an UNMARKED checkbox by default
>>>>>to let the other guy save the game when Tiger is Master.
>>>>>
>>>>>This means the opponent is by default NOT ALLOWED to save the
>>>>>game.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is very unfair behaviour.
>>>>>
>>>>>It's like playing a grandmaster for the first time, then
>>>>>ship the grandmaster to a clinic. They operate him and he has
>>>>>lost all memories about the game!
>>>>>
>>>>>Of course you can avoid this by difficult programming. So saving
>>>>>the game during the game already. Learning during the game etcetera.
>>>>>
>>>>>BUT WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OF THE PROTOCOL THEN?
>>>>>
>>>>>In my opinion it is UNFAIR to by default leave this checkbox unmarked.
>>>>>
>>>>>In the default settings it must be marked!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It is no problem to set the option "marked" as default. I will forward
>>>>the topic to Lex. Maybe he has his reasons, I don't know.
>>>
>>>Thanks, that's what i wanted to hear!
>>>
>>>>One plausible reason is that people don't have an interest at all to
>>>>have the games saved twice. Of course you as a programmer want to have
>>>>the games saved in your own format.
>>
>>
>>Hi Vincent,
>>
>>>People WANT it saved twice,
>>
>>No.
>>
>>Not the majority.
>>
>>Ask the SSDF if they use the "save opponent game" box. I am pretty sure
>>they do not do that.
>>
>>You are a programmer Vincent not a consumer and therefore you have other
>>wishes and demands.
>>
>>
>>
>>>because of interpretation problem.
>>>If you are the only one who is allowed to save it, and we know
>>>for example Rebel-DOS autoplayer arbitrated based upon +5 things,
>>>then confusion can happen about what the result it.
>>
>>All described in the manual.
>>
>>Secondly you can turn it off in case you dislike it.
>>
>>The system is there because I am not interested in double games, clearly
>>won/lost positions, clear draw positions that are continued for 60-100
>>needless moves. The system is responsible that it will speed-up auto232
>>matches with 200-300%.
>>
>>If you dislike it, turn it off.
>>
>>
>>
>>>The result shown by the auto232 players is usually not the objective
>>>results. If however both sides agree that a match ended in a certain
>>>score, then there are little things that need to get checked.
>>
>>You will have to go through all the games manually anyway as in no
>>autoplayer platform you can fully rely on the match score given by
>>the computer.
>>
>>
>>
>>>A double saving of the games is therefore a cool thing!
>>
>>For a programmer yes :)
>>
>>I think that most auto232 lovers do not use the option much.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>But then chess programmers are not in the majority concerning the volume
>>>>of end-users who only care about a wellknown format such as having the
>>>>games in PGN.
>>>
>>>I'm concerned in fair competition.
>>
>>I know!
>>
>>And so do I.
>>
>>
>>
>>>>So I think you are in the minority here, buy hey the option is there
>>>>and that is the main important thing.
>>>
>>>I think i'm in the majority Ed. Fair competition. Just letting one side
>>>save the games is asking for unfair competition. Interpretation of the
>>>facts rather.
>>
>>I don't think it is fair to say that. The option is there, and before you
>>start using software better have a good look what the software is offering
>>you and don't label something as unfair competition because you have not
>>watched the options of the autoplayer software carefully. The option you
>>were looking for is right before your eyes on the (auto232) screen.
>>
>>
>>
>>>apart from that, the one who was hit hardest in past by not saving
>>>games was... ...rebel.
>>
>>You have worked yourself with the provided NONAME driver of the auto232
>>package. You should be an expert concerning its quirks.
>>
>>
>>>Weird that Lex applied the same thing which i found so unfair that it
>>>happened to you!
>>
>>Sure, life is one big conspiracy :)
>>
>>Ed
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>>>The same applies to chessbase products but even worse.
>>>>>
>>>>>First it is very worried about having the right openings book to
>>>>>auto232 play. Secondly it wanted more hashtables and at least a
>>>>>machine with 128mb RAM. Further it wants all EGTBs installed on harddisk.
>>>>>
>>>>>Only after all those criteria are met, then finally fritz wants to
>>>>>auto232 play.
>>>>>
>>>>>The first box you see then it already has by DEFAULT UNMARKED a markbox
>>>>>which will ship a 'save game' command to the opponent after the game.
>>>>>
>>>>>This is pretty unfair!
>>>>>
>>>>>So it wants itself the BEST POSSIBLE conditions, like at least 128mb RAM,
>>>>>a lot of EGTB installed. Hundreds of megabytes of harddisk for a big
>>>>>openingsbook etcetera. All those criteria it wants in order to not even
>>>>>by default give the opponent a 'save game' command after the game,
>>>>>DESPITE THAT THIS IS THE PROTOCOL!
>>>>>
>>>>>Now people can legally complain that their protocol looks like Chrilly/Stefans
>>>>>protocol, but that it is not the same, and that the only differences
>>>>>are that by default chessbase ships some extra commands in order to
>>>>>recognize whether on the other side is also a chessbase program and that
>>>>>the other thing is to by default leave the 'save game' for the opponent
>>>>>is unmarked.
>>>>>
>>>>>all legal crap. JUST GIVE THE SAVE GAME COMMAND by default.
>>>>>
>>>>>That chessbase wants their own main product to win the auto232 matches
>>>>>somehow by shipping commands to other chessbase interfaces to get certain
>>>>>things done, that is completely their own responsibility and decision.
>>>>>Quite logical decision actually. I would want Fritz to win too if it was
>>>>>my main product. I'm not here to speak for how chessbase must run their
>>>>>company. That is their own business.
>>>>>
>>>>>But i'm here for those who want a fair match between non-chessbase products
>>>>>and a chessbase product, as well as chesspartner-tiger,
>>>>>which in future also is going to lose from Fritz as i understood.
>>>>>
>>>>>I understand that programs not learning are greatly influenced by
>>>>>this default unmark trick.
>>>>>
>>>>>You can produce your own PGNs and only those can get interpreted, whereas
>>>>>opponent is NOT allowed to show as slave the pgn, except if that
>>>>>programmer works around this.
>>>>>
>>>>>Much easier as everyone doing a hell of a lot of effort is simply to
>>>>>give everyone that 'save game' command.



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.