Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 11:42:10 01/20/03

On January 20, 2003 at 11:39:27, James T. Walker wrote:

>Neither will 90 rounds.  I've seen some discussion about the
>times/rounds/playoffs of CCT mostly looking for ways to improve the format.  In
>my opinion as a spectator the format is great.  I even liked the playoff format.
> I believe a world championship was decided in a similiar manner not too long
>ago.  Nobody should expect a swiss system event to produce the strongest player
>as the winner every time.


The Swiss system produces two data points:
1.  The strongest player
2.  The weakest player

There is very little you can say about the programs in between these points.
The entire format is dedicated to find the strongest (and by virtue of its
structure it also detects the weakest though that is not the intent).

No other format can come close in accuracy to predicting the strongest program
with a reasonable number of games.  If you want to know how strong *all* of the
programs are, you will have to run round-robins or gauntlets.

>However in my opinion this was the case this time.
>I'm also curious about some programmers claiming the blitz playoff is not good
>because their program is tuned for longer time controls.  I wonder how you do
>that.  I mean if you are playing your program on ICC for games, how does playing
>80% or more of your games at blitz/lightning help you to tune for 40/2?  Why
>would you want your program to perform better at 40/2 than at G/5 compared to
>other engines?  It seems to me that the SSDF is one of the few organizations
>still using 40/2 for comparison.  I see this as an outdated idea.  The trend is
>toward faster time controls to better serve the spectators interest.  All this
>is from a non programming spectator so don't give it much thought.

This is what I call the death of chess and the birth of something new:
"blitz-o-mania"

I hate it.

Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program James T. Walker 13:38:47 01/20/03
- Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 13:51:00 01/20/03
  - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Frank Phillips 14:47:05 01/20/03
    - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 18:18:48 01/20/03
      - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Frank Phillips 10:19:29 01/21/03
      - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 18:20:35 01/20/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 03:00:27 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 11:07:13 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 12:45:56 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 04:55:11 01/22/03
        
        Re: We have no chess journalists in CC! Rolf Tueschen 10:32:59 01/22/03
  - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program James T. Walker 14:02:35 01/20/03
    - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 14:27:44 01/20/03
      - Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 15:08:45 01/20/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 15:34:21 01/20/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 15:41:02 01/20/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 18:15:53 01/20/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 05:26:42 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program James T. Walker 04:33:46 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 11:49:36 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program James T. Walker 15:17:15 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 16:09:17 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 11:51:50 01/22/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Sune Fischer 14:11:26 01/22/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 15:19:45 01/22/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 15:55:28 01/22/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Dann Corbit 16:57:15 01/22/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 05:12:33 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 02:47:24 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program James T. Walker 04:46:29 01/21/03
        
        Re: 9 rounds will not always give you the "best" program Rolf Tueschen 05:10:18 01/21/03

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

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