Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Gromitchess bookcheating (for Vincent DIEPEVEEN)

Author: Pete Galati

Date: 12:49:33 08/23/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 23, 2001 at 15:12:58, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On August 23, 2001 at 14:59:31, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:
>
>>On August 23, 2001 at 14:48:27, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>On August 23, 2001 at 14:42:54, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>
>>>>On August 23, 2001 at 14:36:16, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Use of commercial books is old hat.  You will find that quite a few amateur
>>>>>programs use the fritz 4 book, and have done so openly for many years.
>>>>
>>>>Yes. This is the key issue. They did so openly. While I find
>>>>it a very weird idea that you can be an amateur and use a
>>>>professional book, lying about it is much worse.
>>>>
>>>>>If it is not spelled out as a rules violation, then it is not wrong to do so.
>>>>
>>>>Right and Wrong are not solely determined by written rules.
>>
>>
>>In a sporting event, right and wrong are determined by written and
>>unwritten rules. Was this not allowed by any of those?
>>
>>
>>>>>It probably *should* be specified one way or the other.  I doubt that it has
>>>>>been or the problem would not arise.
>>>>
>>>>I agree 100% here.
>>>>
>>>>>At any rate, an entertaining tournament as always.  Shredder has once again
>>>>>risen to the top, and certainly deserves every accolade.
>>>>
>>>>Darn. It almost looks like this thing can't lose :)
>>>>Why are we holding tournaments still :))
>>>>
>>>>>And Gromit has obviously made enormous strides.
>>>>
>>>>With a dark shadow over those 'accomplishments'...
>>>
>>>From:
>>>http://213.191.70.91/shope/index.html
>>>
>>>We have this:
>>>"GROMIT
>>>by Frank Schneider and Kai Skibbe
>>>
>>>Gromit is a very slow engine in nodes/second. The authors prefer better
>>>positional evaluation over higher speed. They are successfull with this concept.
>>>Gromit doesn´t have to hide behind the fast tacticians. Tactical disadvantages
>>>are compensated with clean positional play. It allows less possibilities for the
>>>tacticians to use their strength. Frank Schneider used to develop Gromit on his
>>>own. With the new version he co-operates with Kai Skibbe. They rewrote the
>>>engine completely which did a lot of good to it. It's much stronger already.
>>>kN/s: 30-35, not faster in the endgame. Taktiktest: 90 solved in 10 seconds
>>>average
>>>
>>>DM 19,90 | Euro 10,17"
>>>
>>>Which I take to mean it is a professional engine [sold for money] and normally
>>>uses the Fritz book anyway n'est ce pas?
>>
>>Got another question here: What the heck is amateur then? What determines that?
>>the price? the sales volume?
>
>Speaking of which, I think it would have been very nice if they put designators
>next to the programs so that we could see which categor[y][ies] they belong in.
>
>For some of the programs with "deep" in their name, it is fairly obvious.  For
>others, it is not so clear.  For instance, I have no idea which programs are
>attempting to compete as amateurs, though some seem to be obviously
>professional.  What about [however] Quest?  I have never seen a program called
>Quest offered for sale.  Is it professional or amateur?  Is the author having
>been paid for *some* program enough to make a program professional?  Can someone
>simply rename their program and change its category?
>
>What about the "Young Talents CD"?  There seem to be several programs on this CD
>which are sold for money and are also entered into the tournament.  Are they
>professional?  Are they amateur?  How do we decide?

In my opinion, and not that I write the rules or're willing to, if a program is
available as a freeware download, even if it is available at a cost as a CB
engine, I still think it qualifies as amateur.  This isn't even a fine line type
of thing, it's available for free, it's an amateur program in my book.

And as far as that book goes, the idea that Frank Schneider would cheat would
never enter my mind.  I never personally met him, but any correspondence I've
had with him over the years indicates that he's an upstanding guy, either that
or he's a hell of a good actor.  I didn't check the rules, but you can bet that
he did, and I seriously doubt that he'd break any.  He might clay animate some,
but not break them.

Pete



This page took 0.12 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.