Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:16:50 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 13:49:34, Chessfun wrote: >On April 17, 2001 at 10:02:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 17, 2001 at 02:43:22, Aaron Tay wrote: >> >>>On April 17, 2001 at 02:03:54, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On April 17, 2001 at 00:19:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 16, 2001 at 23:08:29, Chessfun wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 16, 2001 at 22:46:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 16, 2001 at 19:58:14, Rajen Gupta wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 16, 2001 at 15:52:33, Peter McKenzie wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I've been away from this forum for a while, is this whole thing a bad joke?? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>WHY DO YOU THINK IT I A JOKE? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Otherwise it sounds like a completely ridiculous way to select an opponent for >>>>>>>>>Kramnik. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>WHY IS HAVING A PLAY OFF BETWEEN THE LEADING CONTENDERS CONSIDERED A RIDICULOUS >>>>>>>>WAY TO SELECT THE BEST PROGRAMME? WHAT OTHER WAY CAN YOU SUGGEST? PERHAPS BASED >>>>>>>>ON WHOSE COVER LOOKS THE PRETTIEST? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Any chance you will get your capslock key fixed? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Hehe >>>>>>I have noticed he always does it when replying, but not making an original post. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Do these guys really have the 'authority' to select an opponent for >>>>>>>>>Kramnik? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>THE 'AUTHORITY' HAS BEEN GRANTED BY THE ORGANISERS-IN THIS CASE THE BRAIN GAMES >>>>>>>>NETWORK WHICH IS RAISING THE SPONSORSHIP NECESSARY FOR THIS MATCH.OBVIOUSLY THEY >>>>>>>>MUST HAVE DISCUSSED WITH KRAMNIK HIS WILLINGNESS TO PLAY SUCH A MATCH BEFORE >>>>>>>>COMMITTING THE RESOURCES TO ARRANGE SUCH A COSTLY VENTURE. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Not really. the ICCA is _the_ sanctioning body for computer chess. If >>>>>>>Kramnik wants to play the best computer chess program in the world, the ICCA >>>>>>>should be the entity that provides that rating. Which it does in the form of >>>>>>>two titles, either of which is presently held by Shredder. End of story. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Shredder is the WCCC and WMCCC title-holder. >>>>>> >>>>>>And what to do when you can't reach agreement with Shredder....look elsewhere. >>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Will a match with Kramnik really take place? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>HOPEFULLY IT SHOULD; UNLESS SOMETHING UNFORSEEN (EG WITHDRAWAL OF SPONSORSHIP >>>>>>>>MONEY; SUDDEN CHANGE OF MIND BY KRAMNIK) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Isn't the ICCA involved >>>>>>>>>at all? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>NO, SINCE THEY AREN'T SPONSORING THE MATCH. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>But they _are_ in charge of sanctioning computer chess. And they have a >>>>>>>working relationship with FIDE. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The obvious selection to play Kramnik is Shredder, this is so clear that it is >>>>>>>>>not funny. Shredder is the current World Computer Chess Champion, and has won >>>>>>>>>the majority of important computer tournaments in recent years. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>IF IT IS THAT CLEAR WHY NOT ALLOW IT TO BE MATCHED AGAINST DJ AND DF. SINCE IT >>>>>>>>IS CLEARLY THE BEST IT WILL WIN ANYWAY AND GIVE US THE ADDED BENEFIT OF WATCHING >>>>>>>>ANOTHER COMP VS COMP MATCH BESIDES SETTLING ONCE AND FOR ALL WHICH IS THE >>>>>>>>STRONGEST SMP PROGRAMME. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Shredder beat these programs a year ago in fact... >>>>>> >>>>>>How many games was that, that were played? >>>>>>Im sure the number is going to be convincing. >>>>>>And actually it won a tournament it didn't beat all individual programs. >>>>>> >>>>>>Sarah. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Look at the WCCC crosstable. You will see shredder played _both_ and won >>>>>both games. Two years worth of WMCCC and WCCC events was 21 games. I don't >>>>>think it lost a _single_ game. >>>> >>>>The ssdf list is based on more games. >>>>Shredder was never number 1 in this list. >>>> >>>>It is considered to be also an important tournament and I do not see a reason to >>>>assume that the WMCCC or the WCCC are the only important tournaments. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I was wondering, will the match conditions against Kramnik be closer to that of >>>SSDF conditions or WMCCC conditions? >>> >>>Shredder might not excel under SSDf conditions, but excels in WMCCC conditions[ >>>I.e with operator tuning]. If the match against Krmanik is much like testing in >>>SSDF, sure Shredder might not be the obvious best choice. >>> >>>But if it's closer to the WMCCC condition, perhaps Shredder has a bigger chance? >> >> >>It would be _exactly_ like the WCCC/WMCCC events. Manual operation, only one >>game per day, operator can adjust the book between rounds, etc. > > >Sorry the use of the word _exactly_ is excessive. >The author SMK will not be the operator. Who says? I would bet he would attend. I would were it my program, for example. Or I would send the person that worked on the book or whatever. >Plus you will be playing the same opponent everyday. >And are you so certain adjustment to book will be allowed? I can't imagine it _not_ being allowed, unless you take Kramnik and drug him between rounds so he can't think, can't talk to anyone, and can't study openings, either. >Also in some of these WCCC/WMCCC events they play more than >once per day. In some. Not all. In every ACM/WCCC event _I_ played in we played one game per day, except for the first round or two that would always be on a Sunday. But no "autoplayers" were _ever_ used. Humans were there to tweak and tune between rounds. > >Don't seem to be it would be _exactly_ like either. >Seems more like 50/50. > >Sarah. Seems like 100% to me.... I've been there...
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.