Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Dutch Open Leiden after round 6

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 07:37:19 10/21/02

Go up one level in this thread

On October 21, 2002 at 09:43:57, Uri Blass wrote:

>On October 21, 2002 at 08:05:54, Tony Werten wrote:
>>On October 21, 2002 at 03:48:05, Jeroen Noomen wrote:
>>>On October 21, 2002 at 02:27:01, Tony Werten wrote:
>>>You don't know if your improvement is worth 200 elopoints,
>>>therefore you need to test it thoroughly first :-)
>>Test it ? You mean like play against other programs ? Then what have I been
>>doing this weekend ?
>1)If you have a real big improvement of 200 elo you can test it and get
>conclusions in relatively a short time.

That is not true. Books are too important nowadays. If a couple of
hundreds of thousands of moves get added to a book, then you HAVE
to test all the new lines or you get crushed.

A jump of 200 points from the stronger engines, including strong
amateurs, is not possible.

However playing with a new beta version playing hundreds of points
weaker, that IS possible.

the biggest bugs always appear either in the first move out of book,
or the far endgame. It is a known thing.

also very well known bug is bug in time division.

THAT you can test in a short period of time.

But even despite that short period of time most use to test,
including me (big big problem for diep therefore this weekend),
such bugs somehow do not get out of engines.

I remember insomniac icsvn2
and i remember first few games of ZZZZZZ this tournament where it
also forfeited on time because of using 2-3 minutes each move.

In short, you HAVE to test well.

Even your statement is PROVEN to be not true.

Just a short period of testing, like 200 winboard blitz games and
a few testsets is not enough. period.

>The main problem is when you believe that the improvement is 20-30 elo.
>In this case it is better to use an old version.

Only if you start your engine it is possible to jump quickly from 1000 rating
to 2400 rating. Above that, no 200 point improvements, unless you use
a rating system i do not know yet.

>If the idea how to improve your program by 200 elo is something that you
>implemented only in the last minute(less than 24 hours before the tournament)
>then it is better not to use it before you test it and delay the use of it for
>the second part of the tournament when you have time to test

>24 hours are enough to get 8 games at 90 minutes per game and if you get 6-2
>result against a program at similiar level to your previous version then you can
>be at least sure that the new version is not significantly weaker at the time
>control of the tournament.

8 games 90 0 is not enough to fix bugs in book, not to mention see bugs
in some parts of the evaluation you 'fixed'.

Some things in search, like move ordering, extension on or off, such things
you can RISK doing last moment before tournament.

I do not even take that risk however.

Rewriting i/o i am busy with. i would take *that* risk for coming weekend,
because it should still play the 100% same moves like the old versoin.

so i only have to test whether it doesn't crash. that's all. Hard enough
already to test within 5 days.

>2)I have a question.
>Is there a chance that we are going to see Xinix or Diep(you can answer only for
>xinix) in the WBEC tournament of Leo.

DIEP is not winboard anymore.

DIEP has its own GUI. If leo wants it, he can buy it within some time
and load his winboard engins within DIEP. It is however not released
yet. Winboard can get loaded in the diep GUI.

What ranking does Shredder which is UCI have in his league?

>In the first division there are strong programs like

>Vincent claimed that Diep beated Nimzo98 10-0.

Yes but this is with a bit older tournament book that is well tested.

I do not release diep's tournament book ever, just like Jeroen Noomen
doesn't release the tournament book for tiger and just like Alexander
Kure doesn't release the tournament book for  Fritz and just like
alexander Kure doesn't release the tournament book of Nimzo.

Even then i would expect major scores.

I hope you realize if you get out of book with a pawn less, that
winning is very hard.

Nimzo2000 is completely different from nimzo98, because nimzo98 had
a book from 1998 and nimzo98 would never get above 10 ply much.

Nimzo2000 does and it has a book from 2000, which is like 2 years
difference and a very important difference.

I do not see why you feel that 2 years of difference is not 'significantly'
better. What is that for stupid statement you made?

The book is a major difference. The 2000 book from nimzo2000 has the
NCO99 book already incorporated into it. that is a *major* step forward
in openings theory compared to the old crap book from 1997 (crap in
2002, not crap in 1997 of course).

Or do you deny that?

>If that is the case then he can participate in WBEC and score clearly better
>than Nimzo2000 because I believe that Nimzo2000 is not significantly better than


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.