Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:37:32 09/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 19, 2002 at 14:46:59, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On September 19, 2002 at 14:20:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 19, 2002 at 11:47:01, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On September 19, 2002 at 11:24:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>The only thing that concerns me is that anytime a brand new and unheard-of >>>>engine pops up, it is cause for concern _and_ suspicion. It might be perfectly >>>>legitimate, who knows. But remember "voyager", "le petite", "bionic impact", >>>>"gunda" and others? >>>> >>>>Jumping way up to near the front of the pack is not easy. Doing it without >>>>ever having been to a public event is even more unlikely. >>>> >>>>It would be interesting to examine the executable if anyone has a copy, to >>>>avoid the suspicions before they start to grow... >>> >>>That suspicion is natural, but if this engine really is that strong, then he >>>must have improved a lot on Crafty or whatever code he used. >>>There has been many Crafty clones, but no one actually stronger than Crafty >>>AFAIK, so Ruffian is really not your average clone in that case. >>> >> >>It depends. IE on any given day, crafty can beat anybody, or be beaten by >>anybody. Look at the results for "Le Petite". It looked very strong. Yet >>it was an absolute copy... >> >> >> >>>But apart from that, have you ever really gone over all the open source programs >>>out there, and what about the CCC archives? There is plenty of information >>>available to build a mighty strong engine. I don't think it could be done in 6 >>>months, but who knows how much time he spent on it, hopefully it was a good >>>decade ;) >>> >>>-S. >> >>That's the point. I can't imagine someone working on an engine, in a vacuum, >>for a decade, before anyone finds out about it. I can't imagine anyone writing >>a program in 6 months that would come close to beating _any_ top program. >> >>Anything is possible, I will agree. But the probability is so low that it >>will make people wonder... > >I hope you realize that you have essentially *publicly* leveled an accusation >without presenting any evidence. I would prefer in such cases that either an >investigation be conducted discretely or a wait and see policy be followed. I haven't leveled _any_ accusation whatsoever. I asked a direct question, pointing out what has happened in the past. I have _not_ said that this program is a "clone" or anything else, and you can feel free to find some- thing I wrote that does make that claim... As I said previously, I find it _hard_ to believe that a newcomer would be that strong. _not_ impossible, just _unlikely_. I stand by that... If some- one takes that the wrong way, fine by me...
This page took 0.07 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.