Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 06:03:36 05/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2001 at 08:33:19, Peter Berger wrote: >I think the CCT3 was a great and enjoyable event ! The atmosphere was very >friendly and there were no debates this time . > >A few ideas and suggestions for future events though: > >a.) Every engine participating should be able to and do write logfiles . These >should be sent to some arbiter right after the game has been finished in case of >debates. > >As far as I know every participant would have been able to do so ( for example >for the WinBoard programs the winboard.debug would be sufficient ) . > I agree. I wonder if it would be possible to allocate a channel for each competitor and make sure that they kibitz their evals into that channel. Then interested spectators could observe the game and join the channels of the participants. We could ask ICC to save the info spewed into these channels for a period so that any disputes could be addressed. Of course, all this would require FAR more organization, and would raise problems: what if a program didn't do this properly? etc.. >b.) Unknown programs > >There have been a few unfriendly remarks about Searcher . This program was known >though and had competed on the servers for a while . So everyone interested >could have had a look at some of its games before the tournament started . I >expected Searcher to do quite OK . > I agree one hundred percent. >I am much more concerned about Butcher . This program was completely unknown and >never played any public games before the tournament . Please : I really don't >want to say anything bad about this program and its author - I only think there >should be some general policy for cases like this one before the next CCT is >announced. A very simple policy would be that the program must have been "public" (eg available for purchase/download or playing on a server) for at least n months before the start of the tourney. I've not given this much thought, but there must be *some* possibility. Again, this makes the event harder to arrange. > >c.) Tiebreakers . > >Before the tournament starts the rules should be clear . There was a little >discussion after the tournament about a tie-break between Fritz and Ferret . >With all of the opponents close together Buchholz or a similar system probably >would be fine - again I think this should be decided before the tournament >starts . > Yeah. I was against the tiebreaker because many of the participants had left. I don't think it matters *how* the winner is chosen, so long as something is arranged beforehand. >d.) Number of Rounds > >8 rounds ( as any even number ) is not a good number for a Swiss event . 5,7 or >9 ( odd ) are much better . Some expert for the Swiss system could explain >better than me . Main reason is the colour issue in the even rounds as far as I >remember . > I think with an odd number of rounds, every one gets either 5 W and 4 B or vice versa. With an even number of rounds, some people will probably end up with 3W and 5B. >e.) Manual Programs > >To say it frankly : I think they should be forbidden for the CCTs . In this >tournament only SOS and Diep were manual ; for both programs automated versions >would have been availlable, too . Both operators are beyond any doubt - I am >100% sure they operated fair . It's just the potential for trouble with manually >operated programs I think should be avoided . > DEFINITELY. An Xboard interface is REALLY easy if you've written a ches program. Manual operation is not necessary. >f.) GM/IM commentary > >This was a brilliant feature - I really hope you'll keep it for future >tournaments. > Yes. Kudos for IM Schroer for posting so many insightful comments and for getting so excited about the whole event. His enjoyment really came across in his commentary. >g.) Contacting ICCA ? > >I think the CCTs are great events and might be the future for computerchess >tournaments . Maybe the ICCA should be contacted so there could be an official >title to be earned there ? > Hmmm... I think part of the charm of this is the informality. Maybe in addressing some of these issues we'd gain a more "professional" tournament, but lose some of the spontaneity and fun? >Everything IMHO - of course . > >pete Andrew PS Congratulations to Gerrit on Der Bringer's fine performance!
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.