Computer Chess Club Archives




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

Author: pavel

Date: 14:49:15 09/19/02

Go up one level in this thread

On September 19, 2002 at 17:37:32, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>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 ;)
>>>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...

No offense.
But you had the same impression when YACE came out.
It is a fact that Yace came out of blue and became as strong as Crafty in a very
short time.
Same can be said about Aristarch, which also improved in a very short time.

I don't think it is very hard to believe that a program can be so strong in a
short time (we don't even know how long Ruffian has been developed for).

Given enough dedication it is very much possible, IMO.

There are several good examples of winboard engine which became very strong on
very short time, none of them happens to be crafty clone.


This page took 0.16 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.