Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CCT3 conclusions

Author: David Rasmussen

Date: 13:39:57 05/29/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 29, 2001 at 16:14:24, Djordje Vidanovic wrote:

>On May 29, 2001 at 13:45:19, David Rasmussen wrote:
>
>>On May 29, 2001 at 12:48:01, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>>
>>>On May 29, 2001 at 09:08:53, David Rasmussen wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't understand why so many people make such precise conclusions from the
>>>>result of CCT3. The number of games played was so small that it is not even
>>>>remotely close to be statistically significant. It's not to belittle the victory
>>>>of Ferret, as it's not a bad candidate for (one of) the best programs
>>>>participating. It's just that one can't conclude anything about a program such
>>>>as shredder, based on such sparse material. And I'm not even going to go into
>>>>the hardware differences and handicaps, that makes the results even more random.
>>>>
>>>>When I look at the final standing of the tournament, I agree with the order of
>>>>engines in general. That is, Celes and Chezzz _are_ probably weaker than Fritz
>>>>and Ferret. But I'm also convinced that Shredder, Yace, LambChop and other are
>>>>generally better than GNUChess (although I've never found GNUChess to be as bad
>>>>as everyone says). So let's all take CCT3 for what it is: good fun.
>>>
>>>Of course.  All you can do is give yourself a chance to win.
>>>
>>
>>Yep. I will have to work a little better on _that_ part next time :)
>>Of course, I didn't expect to win any games as I had done no preparations with
>>my engine at all.
>>
>>>>BTW. I can't wait until it's time for CCT4. Can't we make a monthly 1 day
>>>>tournament, just for fun? I don't know anything about tournament systems, but
>>>>there must be some kind of knockout system, where a lot of programs can play a
>>>>tournament in relatively short time. This should be absolutely informal, and
>>>>participation should be done by just showing up on the server 30 minutes in
>>>>advance or so.
>>>
>>>Augh, eek.
>>>
>>>bruce
>>
>>What does that mean? That it is a bad idea? In that case, why?
>
>
>Because some people get booted off by their ISPs every two hours, or three hours
>on the hour.  So if you just stay put and loiter for half an hour on ICC only to
>show that you are there, consider that a good reason for tongue biting and
>saying 'ouch, eek' etc.
>
>***  Djordje

Well, the 30 minutes wasn't important. It could be 5 minutes for all I care.
It's just that such a tournament will last somewhat long anyway, so a little
more time before starting, shouldn't make the difference. The important thing
about my suggestion wasn't how to do it, but just that we _should_ do it.

I guess somethings would have to be automated. The participants should be known
before start (well, duh), and the pairing should be done automatically somehow.
There are tournament bots on FICS, that I think could manage this. I don't know.
In fact, I don't have an idea of how the details should work in this, I just
want to do it. But maybe the details are too difficilt to overcome, and thats
why we don't do it. I don't know. I just want to play :)




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.