Author: Uri Blass
Date: 17:41:35 01/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2003 at 19:49:17, Matthew Hull wrote: >On January 20, 2003 at 16:46:23, Uri Blass wrote: > >>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. > > >Are they sharing this information? In general, no. So what is the >contribution? > >Matt Even the programmers who say nothing share information like pv of the program and evaluation and it can help other programmers to learn about problems with their evaluation. It is possible to try to guess searching rules of other programs by looking at the pv. Saying that they contribute nothing is wrong. 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.