Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Programmer vs Program strength

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 08:04:21 06/08/98

Go up one level in this thread


On June 08, 1998 at 09:36:13, Djordje Vidanovic wrote:

>On June 08, 1998 at 07:10:37, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>
>>Are they really inflated, considering that at icc the average
>>timecontrol of
>>a game is way faster?
>>
>>At fics 2 12 is normal.
>>At icc 3 0 is normal (although i prefer 3 1 or 5 0 myself).
>>
>>That explains it.
>>
>>Even at 5 3 against a program you make less chance than at 2 12,
>>where 5 3 is normal time control to play against a program and
>>at fics 2 12.
>>
>>Also at icc way faster hardware and way better players are there.
>>I don't play at fics myself because of lack of playing strength.
>>
>>I'm rated 2444 (diepeveen account)
>>myself btw right now, which is way below my TPR
>>in normal blitz event in for example Utrecht where i got over 2500
>>because i got 12 out of 19 against masses of IM's and GM's,
>>so i'm underrated at ICC.
>>
>>Furthermore there is a beautiful interface at icc for chessplayers
>>called
>>blitzin. This is way better than good old winboard/xboard or other
>>interfaces.
>>
>>This all together explains why programs at icc are way higher rated,
>>unless there are some faults in it, because then there are always
>>players
>>who make good use out of it.
>>
>>Like the offering draw at move 1 of Diep, which is a major pain, just
>>like
>>forfeiting in drawn positions around move 130.
>>Nearly all accept that draw offer.
>>
>>At FICS they would miss it, as winboard doesn't clearly show the
>>drawoffer.
>>Not to talk about xboard.
>>
>>For my chessprogram winboard however is a great invention.
>>
>>Thanks Tim!
>>
>>Greetings,
>>Vincent
>
>
>Hello Vincent!
>
>I don't think that your observations regarding FICS and ICC are correct.
>Yes, there are more and stronger players on ICC, but the ratings are
>inflated as compared with FIDE ELO, and by extension as compared with
>FICS.  Another thing, it is not the case that the most frequent time
>control on FICS is 2 12, I'd say that the commonest control is 3 0, or
>perhaps 5 0.
>A good proof for this is the strongest Crafty machine (the same
>characteristics on both servers), which is close to 300 pts apart --
>Crafty being about 2650 on FICS, and 2950 on ICC.  I am 2270 on FICS,

Crafty at icc runs at a 4 processor machine with 512MB SDRAM and is
rated:
Bughouse    ----  [6]     0     0     0     0
Bullet      2899       4811  1193   724  6728   3108 (04-Jul-1997)
Blitz       2819      39431 11116  6408 56955   3041 (10-May-1998)
Standard    2490       2839  1129   666  4634   2680 (31-Aug-1997)

 1: Crafty v15.12 (4 cpus)

So 2819.

>having played most of my games at 3 0.  I can offer you a friendly blitz
>match, say at 5 0, anytime you wish on FICS, so we can test the
>respective ratings in more detail.  About the insufficient strength of
>players on FICS, you are wrong again. There are at least 30 players of
>IM strength there, and each evening you can run into at  five or six of

Some GM's at ICC:

The GM list:
     A-Greenfeld  DaveNogood    GMDavies     Kaidanov    nataf
Speelman
     A-Huzman     DaVinci       GMSoffer     Karpov      Nikolaidis
spicegirl
     Agdestein    Deep-Blue     GREF         Kasparov    NNG
Stefansson
     airgun       DGurevich     Gulko        kc          Nosaint
Sweere
     AlexandreL   DirtyHarry    HandokoE     Kempka      Olafsson
Taimanov
     anat         dixon         HarZvi       Kevlar      p-svidler
tigre
     Andersson    Dlugy         Heine        KingLoek    PBS
Tioro
     Ariela       Dr            Helgi        KNEZ        phips
Tisdall
     AttackGM     Dranov        Henley       Kotronias   Psakhis
TonyM
     B-Alterman   Dumbo         hernandez    Kramnik     R-HarZvi
Topalov
     BabyBoss     E-Sutovsky    Hertie       Krogius     RACP
TTivel
     BadViking    feeai         Hugo         kudrin      Ree
UAndersson
     Bareev       Figo          hugo2        L-Psakhis   Repref
V-Smyslov
     BaskMask     FlamingSkull  I-Manor      L-Yudasin   Ricardi
Vadik
     BenYehuda    flatliner     I-Smirin     Lein        rohde
Vagr
     Berliner     fosti         Igrok        Leon        Sagalchik
WBrowne
     BigD         frenchkiller  infochess    leop        SAgdestein
Wilder
     Blatny       Fright        Inov         Lev         scratchy
Wojtkiewicz
     blow         G-Kasparov    Itsonlyme    LevAlburt   Securitron
Y-Averbach
     bluedog      gahan         JacaGlaca    Lombardy    seinfeld
Y-Kosashvili
     BuffaloJim   Gambrinus     JAntonio     lycan       Serper
Yan
     Buzzcut      garompon      jaque13      Margeir     Shakespeare
Yermo
     cambala      gasch         JudgeDredd   marnold     Shamkovich
Yotam
     Camila       GataKamsky    JuditPolgar  Mgur        Shirov
YoungLasker
     Chernin      Gatotkaca     juliana      MiK         Short
     chukcha      Gelfand       JulioGranda  moggy       Sorokin
     Conguito     Geysir        Julius       mquinteros  Spangenberg
     Dahlia       GMAlex        junior       mysko       Spanish-Champ
aics%

Waiting for your list.

>those... Another thing to illustrate the FICS ratings -- I know of at
>least five FMs, rated less than 2100 on FICS, and on ICC they would
>surely be over 2400. A new FICS acquisition, GM Robespierre is also
>there waiting for sceptics like you...

FICS was too weak for me when i played there lately,
but even bigger reason why i never play there is that port 5000 is
needed.
If i can use port 23 i can get directly in. SO I CANNOT CONNECT TO ALL
SERVERS
WITH PORTS OVER 1000. This is valid for masses of players. Ports above
1000
is hard.

Why not the easy and standard port 23?

Hope this is not to hard for you to understand.

I think that another the part everyone underestimates: The wider the
pyramid
the higher the top.

FICS has no wide pyramid of strong IM's and masses of GM's, so it has no
top.

So if some GM's (masses of gm's at icc, like Kasparov, Svidler, and
probably
even Kramnik) play a computer and lose against it at 3 0, then
this computer gets up in rating, and can remain at this rating,
yet at FICS it would play still the same  strength and be rated lower.

It's a complex system, and i think inflation is not the right word,
because you cannot compare normal rating to blitz rating,
and the different type of players that get compared: computers get
compared
with humans, and there a lot goes wrong.

The second reason is that pyramid and the fact that the stronger blitz
players
play there:
at blitz i perform 2500. At normal level i have 2227 national rating.

In blitz way more people play and way more games gets played, so it's
very
questionable what rating is more accurate. I tend to think the blitz
rating
is more accurate, because it is based on way more games.

this all together leads to a way bigger pyramid, in which computers do
good
buiseness, and the top of the pyramid is of course way higher than the
normal
tournament chess.

>Regards,
>Djordje (wolfv on FICS)

P.S.
I tried to log on at FICS: freechess.org right?
Didn't succeed, cannot use channel 5000.

Try to log on at chess.lm.com, and challenge me, preferably
5 0, as coming saturday there is an interesting dutch blitz championship
where
25,000 total prize money gets divided!

Greetings,
Vincent.



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.