Author: Jonas Bylund
Date: 06:28:10 06/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 2003 at 01:31:01, Jim Bodkins wrote: >On June 05, 2003 at 01:02:23, Jim Bodkins wrote: > >>I have noticed a group of people that seems to vicariously play through their >>engines. I have actually had people say to me that the speed of the system was >>irrelevant. (And that if I had been around long enough I would have known that. >>SaltyBalls - who not surprisingly has one of the faster systems). >> >>My intent at playchess is to "tweak" a personality of theking. (At least I would >>like to finish that). Playing such a random collection of systems - many of >>which are not identified in terms of hardware - makes that difficult. >> >>It occured to me that it should be possible to define competition categories >>based upon hardware performance. (Or allow formulas based upon hardware >>performance). If the engines had a standard set of quick tests that did a >>thumbnail of that systems performance and sent that to the other engine >>(exchange) in order to qualify the game, it would help provide meaningfull >>engine match results. (Rather than what happens now. The same old engine but >>runnng on a dual 3gig xeon playing a P4 1.4 gig. Meaningless). >> >>Any thoughts from the engine programmers? Call it a performance Gnomon. It could >>be a polynomial/vector of sorts with the coefficients being values for standard >>tests. >> >>I just love it when I see 1200 kN/s on a system that is identified as a Pentium >>300 laptop. :) > >The performance gnomon could be something like crafty's bench() function for >example. This is a great idea! i stopped having my computer play at playchess because the top 20-30 was the same 3 engines (no names :)) and because people vicariously, as you put it, used whatever they could to win rating!!?? Example: some guy tried to convince me that the program he used to beat my Deep Fritz 7 account running on a dual amd 1600+ 6 times in a row, was Zchess 2.something (i think) on a 500 Mhz Celeron and that the reason his account won so much was a secret opening book :) Now i don't mind my account losing, but i don't like that "anything-goes-in-the-quest-of-boosting-your-rating" mentality. Also the top accounts (besides from being the same engines) almost never have any info on who is running the account, what hardware etc. And if they do, they seem to be less than truthful about it. In conclusion i really like the idea that you could KNOW if the opposing account is fairly matched within an acceptable margain say +/- 200 Mhz, or whatever you alternatively put in your formula. Regards Jonas
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.