Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:46:23 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2003 at 16:31:56, Matthew Hull wrote: >On January 20, 2003 at 16:09:28, Peter Kappler wrote: > >>On January 20, 2003 at 15:38:00, Peter Skinner wrote: >> >>>With the lack of commercial products participating in the CCT, does it lose some >>>of the luster in winning it? >>> >>>Of course there are always going to be "what ifs" when all participants do not >>>play. Ferret was allowed to play without kibitzing any information. What would >>>have happened if Fritz joined and did the same? Would the result have been the >>>same? >>> >>>It seems that there was allowances made for some, and not others. Why was this >>>the case? >>> >> >>Volker told everyone who wasn't kibitzing on day 1 was told they had to kibitz >>on day 2, or face disqualification. To my knowledge, everybody complied, >>including Ferret. >> >> >>>I am sure if the rule had not been in place, the likes of Shredder, Fritz, and >>>possibly Junior would have participated. >> >>I don't think kibitzing was an issue at all. It's obvious why Junior didn't >>particpate - they are busy preparing for their match with Kasparov. >> >>Rebel & Tiger have never participated. Ed has publically stated that he think >>the potential for cheating is too high. I think Christophe may share this >>opinion, but I am not certain. >> >>Don't know why Fritz and Shredder weren't there. Maybe they just weren't >>interested, but it wouldn't surprise me if the marketing people at Chessbase >>discouraged them from entering. Suppose Fritz and Shredder enter, and neither >>of them wins? Quite possible, considering the strength of the field, and while >>none of us would find this result shocking, a casual computer chess fan might >>suddly wonder why they should spend their money on Fritz & Shredder when there >>are free amateur programs that are similar in strength. >> >> >>> Chess Tiger already has the ability to >>>kibitz the pv from the program, so that was not Christophe's reasoning for not >>>joining. >>> >>>I think that if a program is automated is enough to play in the next CCT. If not >>>then we might have the same result. >> >> >>I like the kibitzing rule. It's fun to see what each engine is thinking. I had >>one game where my engine's eval was almost 2 pawns different from my opponent's >>engine, so we began discussing the details of our evaluation functions. This is >>much better than keeping all this stuff hidden and mysterious. >> >> >>-Peter > > >I agree fully with your comments. Personally, I could care less that the >commercial programs were not there. They contribute exactly zero to computer >chess, IMO. I disagree. I do not need them in that tournament but saying that the contribute exactly zero to computer chess is wrong. Ed the programmer of Rebel contributed to computer chess by discovering a lot of information and other programmers also may follow him in the future. Uri
This page took 0 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.