Computer Chess Club Archives




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

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 05:58:16 09/20/02

Go up one level in this thread

On September 20, 2002 at 08:33:37, pavel wrote:

>On September 20, 2002 at 07:51:16, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>>On September 20, 2002 at 07:34:02, pavel wrote:
>>>The point is that it is possible to not post in winboard forum and other forum
>>>but come up with a strong engine.
>>>I don't see programmer of Fritz brag about his program and perticipate in any
>>>Why is it not possible for someone else?
>>>Does his silence means that there is something fishy about his program?
>>No, it doesn't by default. There are plenty of examples to invalidate that
>>theory. The interesting bit is the actual development time. You can make an
>>argument about how long it'll take to develop an engine of a certain strength.
>>But even that becomes subjective rather quickly (ie. pure guesswork) as you
>>can't exclude the likelihood of immense talent, nor avoid the fact that sources
>>are available in abundance nowadays, be it papers or source code. The discussion
>>is, or becomes, rather tedious without an actual executable to confirm or
>>support various allogations. That isn't foolproof either.
>I agree.
>The only way to know if it is a clone (which I highly doubt) or not, is by
>having access to the executable.
>Without that, we can make guesses, and try to prove each other with past similar
>scenarios, but we cannot come into conclutions.
>Here are possible reasons why I think it is not a clone:

Nobody claims that there is a proof that it is a clone but I clearly do
not like the author's decision not to play with it in tournaments before
having a very strong engine and hiding everything.


This page took 0.01 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.