Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 16:53:23 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2001 at 18:38:42, Mike S. wrote: >On April 16, 2001 at 15:52:33, Peter McKenzie wrote: > >>(...) >>Firstly, any qualification tournament should be an author operated manual >>tournament on hardware selected and supplied by the author. Only this way can >>we be certain that each program will play at its best. > >Do you realise that this is a double-edged sword, at least for a top class >commercial product? The customers don't get author operation, or hardware >selection and supply by the author, when they buy a program. > >So if I am repeatadly told, this program is at its best operated by its author >etc., I'm going to think it will not be at it's best when I use it myself on my >two years old computer, compared to other programs that do not claim this. It's >pure anti-PR. > >Although I wonder if a program calculates faster, if the author clicks the >mouse. :o) Very funny :-) But really, I think your joke is misplaced. Its not that the programs can't play their best when the author is not present, the point is that if the author is present we can be SURE that the program is operating conditions which are optimal for it. If the program is operated by a 3rd party, then it is still possible that the program is operating under optimal conditions BUT we have a number of issues: 1) The 3rd party is unlikely to be as careful as the author. The author has invested many years in his program, and therefore has much greater motivation for making sure that everything is set up 100% right. All those little things like selecting the right book, turning pondering on, configuring for the right number of CPUs, setting the right hash sizes, making sure that no other processes are stealing CPU, making sure tablebases are installed correctly etc etc. Of course a 3rd party will probably get these things right, but if you had to bet your life on it I think you'd rather have the program author doing it. 2) The author will be much more capable of diagnosing any problems than a 3rd party. Problems? What problems you say. Well, lets think about hardware problems for a start. Memory can fail from time to time, and of course hard drives can fail too. And how about the CPU? Remember when Ed Shroeder managed to demonstrate that his Kryotech chip was faulty in one of the Rebel matches? These things are somewhat rare, although they are more common on the sort of state of art hardware that is likely to be in use. In any case, the author is likely to spot the problem (and recommend a course of action) before anyone else. 3) Fairness: of course the 3rd party should be impartial, but how can we be sure of this? I don't personally know the people involved in the Kramnik qualification match, although I assume they are probably fair and unbiased. However I would have alot more faith in a competition being fair if the authors were present because I know they are going to make sure that they are getting a fair deal. Its like the old saying goes: 'Justice must not only be done, it must be seen to be done'. That about sums it up really. Regards, Peter McKenzie
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.