Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Ruffian 0.76 is still playing incredible strong!

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 0.06 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.