Author: James Robertson
Date: 14:28:19 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 16:59:20, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >First of all these are the CONDITIONS for the match vs Kramnik. >Use of a SMP-macine with 8cpus. POINT > >I was asked to recommend the STRONGEST programs for a qualifying tournament. >The qualifyer should be used to pick the BEST program and not the "luckiest". >Therefore it should be played in longer matches. Again and I repeat in order to >minimize the randomness it shouldn't be played in a short tournament in a few >rounds. This idea is not correct in that the top of the food chain in a comp - comp tourney does is not at all necessarily the best against a human. I think that it is necessary also for a manually operated tournament, operated by the programmer or someone close to the programmer. For instance, Shredder has won EVERY tournament in the past few years it has competed in. In every tournament in which Stefan/Ossi did not operate though, it has not won (Cadaques, Aufsess, etc.). I think you _cannot_ say this is just "luck". It looks _very_ much like there is a correlation here. Also, how can you leave programs like Ferret, Crafty, and Darkthought out of your calculations? These are obviously very strong programs, on par with the others you listed. Crafty performed excellently in Ed's super long tournament, so it may be even stronger on this 8 processor machine that we can anticipate. My point boils down to this: the top programs are so close in strength that a long comp - comp tournament will probably not pick the strongest program against humans. In my opinion it is much better to either choose Shredder (the WCCC and WMCCC twice) as the contestant or to hold a qualifying tournament with a much larger selection of programs in which the programmers operate their own programs. James
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.