Computer Chess Club Archives




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

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 00:59:53 09/21/02

Go up one level in this thread

On September 21, 2002 at 03:31:01, pavel wrote:

>On September 20, 2002 at 14:44:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>On September 20, 2002 at 07:34:02, pavel wrote:
>>>On September 20, 2002 at 02:17:19, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>Again, this is _not_ the same thing.  Yace improved a lot, quickly.  But the
>>>>>>author was here participating in discussions, present on ICC, etc.  So he
>>>>>>didn't just "drop out of the sky".  When _that_ happens, suspicions are bound
>>>>>>to be tweaked...
>>>>>Actually, Dieter started posting in here and log in to ICC much later IIRC.
>>>>>At first he only used to post at winboard forum IIRC.
>>>>It is not important for this discussion.
>>>As I said (you snipped): "Not that it has anything to do with anything. ;)"
>>>>The point is that the author of Ruffian does not post in the winboard forum and
>>>>I do not know that he post in another forum.
>>>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?
>>You miss the point completely.  Frans _has_ attended _many_ wmccc and WCCC
>>type events.  While he doesn't discuss "secrets" he does discuss chess and
>>fritz/quest all the time.  Again, he didn't just drop out of the sky.  Neither
>>did Lang.  Ed.  Hirsch.  Slate/Atkin.  Thompson.  Hyatt.  Hsu.  nor any of
>>the more recent micro programs...
>>If someone is developing a strong program, they almost certainly have input
>>from somewhere...  Or they are playing it against other players.  There is no
>>incentive to develop a chess engine in a dark cave with no lights.  Part of
>>the fun is busting humans...  And that makes it public.
>For me the discussion seems to be going around a circle.
>So I just want to reply this perticular post.
>I disagree with your analogy, that just because he didn't perticipate in any of
>the WMCC or any of the forums that we know of, he is very unlikely to come up
>with a strong engine.
>1) We don't know if he has shared his views with anyone knowledgable about CC.
>   Just because it wasn't anyone in this forum, doesn't necessarily mean there
>   is noone outside this forum.
>   To give an example, as Dieter has said (sorry to Dieter for dragging him
>   so many times to prove my point) the first time Dieter spoke with someone
>   in the "Computer Chess Community" was with you (which you most likely don't
>   remember) and that too few years ago. Before coming in public in
>   the "Computer Chess Community", he worked on his program for 7-8 yrs and
>   none of us knew it. Thus, it is possible to work silently on a program for so
>   long without "coming out in open".

The program was weaker than crafty in the first release inspite of the fact that
Dieter is a good programmer.
I believe that one of the reasons that yace improved rapidely later is fidback
that Dieter got from testers.

I did not know at that time that Dieter worked 8 years on it but I remember from
a post of Dann Corbit that Dieter is good in math and not only in programming
and I thought that it is a big advantage.

I believe that people with talent for math can think of better ideas because
math is about thinking.
being a good programmer is important for implementing the ideas.

The point is that even Dieter did not have something that is better than Crafty
in his first release.

>   Now, how strong the program will be depends on the programmer.
>2) Question: How many of you guys knew about Gandalf and it's programmer, before
>   it came out as a commercial engine? In what forums did he actively
>   perticipate? How many tournaments did it play before coming out as a
>   commercial software?

I do not know how many tournament did it play but I know that it played in
tournaments many years ago.

I rememeber reading about it and based on my memory the first versions of
gandalf used too much selective search so they were not good and only after the
programmer dropped selective search the program improved significantly.


This page took 0.03 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.