Author: margolies,marc
Date: 18:00:23 06/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
Me thinks these hi tech rascals will just connect their MP comps to a dedicated 'slow machine' with some sort of gerry-rigged interface. You can't expect cheaters to play by your rules especially when you give them another 'cheat' to cream about. n June 05, 2003 at 09:28:10, Jonas Bylund wrote: >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.