Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCT3 is over

Author: Bruce Moreland

Date: 10:30:44 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 ) .

There are some weird people out there who either want to take credit for other
people's work.  I think there have been some others who don't realize that their
own work is pretty insignificant compared to what was already present in what
they started from.

I think it would be really hard to start a program from Crafty and have it be so
highly modified that Bob isn't still primary author, or at least a very
important co-author.

So I think that any Crafty clones should be out, no matter how much work the
author claims to have put in.

If this is made plain up front, I think we'll eliminate at least some of the
problem.  If one slips through, it's annoying but not crushing.  If one wins the
tournament, perhaps we'll figure it out at some time and give half a bravo to
Bob.

>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 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.

This is troubling, but also troubling is the idea of submitting newbies to an
annoying and unfriendly process before a tournament whose result is not really
that important.

>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 .

I can go both ways on this.  I've been involved in some playoff games.
Personally, I prefer not to play them.  They come at the end of the tournament,
after the schedule end-time, after you are exhausted, and after you've explained
to your wife that you are almost done with the event.  The pressure is extremely
intense, and I don't like that.

An event that has this many rounds should have a clear winner or the Bukholz
points should be good enough.

It's entertaining for the spectators to have a playoff, but it's a little hard
to do a fair one, because it's hard to fairly assign colors and you have to deal
with the possibility of draws and how to handle those, etc.

>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 .
>
>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 .

This is fair enough.  It should be a priority for every programer these days to
get an ICC interface.

There are obviously a lot of ways to cheat if you don't have an automatic
interface, but another real problem is that it is hard *not* to influence the
game if you are manually operated.  You have to mess with time controls and all
that.  It's hard to even think of a way to do that impartially, without
accumulating tons of time or flagging.

>f.) GM/IM commentary
>
>This was a brilliant feature - I really hope you'll keep it for future
>tournaments.

IM Jonathan Schroer is my friend and I recommended him for this job.  He enjoyed
the job and I think he would want to do it again.  He has some experience with
computers and is willing to work hard and not be a snob just because he can play
chess and we can't.  There are some others with higher ratings who might do it,
but it's important not to select only based upon rating or title, otherwise you
end up with someone who can play chess but can't or won't type in anything that
is useful and improves the atmosphere of the event.

IM Schroer is a Montessori school teacher outside of chess.  He's used to not
being an ass to people who don't know as much as he does.

>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 ?

I think that Daniel Sleator (Darooha) wanted to get ahold of them and make
something official, but by that time it was too late.  I don't think there is
any need to have this be a championship of anything.  Aegon was not a
championship of anything, but everyone had fun.  Same thing with the yearly
Paderborn event.  This can just be the CCT, and that should be enough.

I think it might be possible to advertise the event more heavily.  It's a fun
event, and a fairly unique event, and if people come and watch they'll see
something that isn't very common.  I think the average chess person is
interested in computer chess, and might enjoy attending a real computer chess
tournament.

bruce

>Everything IMHO - of course .
>
>pete



This page took 0.01 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.