Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 11:55:56 10/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 28, 2003 at 13:32:27, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On October 28, 2003 at 12:43:27, Djordje Vidanovic wrote:
>
>>On October 28, 2003 at 10:55:53, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On October 28, 2003 at 10:38:04, Djordje Vidanovic wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 28, 2003 at 09:42:48, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>No. If you look at _my_ history with Cray Blitz you will see that I
>>>>>discovered that we played better with 1. d4 as white. We had some
>>>>>reasonable positional knowledge that helped in the more strategic
>>>>>openings that arise from 1. d4. I didn't do it because I thought I
>>>>>was hurting my chances of winning... I did it because I thought it
>>>>>_helped_.
>>>>>
>>>>>I assume Jeroen did the same thing. Perhaps some of his 1. e4 lines
>>>>>led Sjeng into positions it didn't like or understand or play very well.
>>>>>It would be natural to try to avoid them.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have this horrible tendency to believe that most people do their
>>>>>very best when helping others. I can't imagine him intentionally
>>>>>preparing a book for Sjeng that would decrease its chances of winning.
>>>>>
>>>>>Now if you want to argue that one book author should not be allowed to
>>>>>prepare an opening book for three different programs, there I agree 100%.
>>>>>I can't contribute significant pieces of code to three different programs
>>>>>and have them all play in ICCA events. I don't see why someone can
>>>>>contribute three significant opening books (which can go as deep as 20 moves
>>>>>in a game that may only last 40 moves). The ICCA is completely out of
>>>>>touch with common sense here, mainly because of $$$ I assume.
>>>>>
>>>>>What is happening is wrong. But it isn't wrong because Jeroen is trying to
>>>>>make Sjeng lose. It is wrong because one person is helping _three_ programs
>>>>>to win. That is bogus. The ICCA _knows_ it is bogus. But they let it
>>>>>continue, for reasons only they have.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes. What you said makes perfect sense. I had problems understanding that: I
>>>>had always thought of Jeroen as the Rebel book author -- now you see him as the
>>>>Tiger and Deep Sjeng book author as well. I am not saying that it is dishonest
>>>>on his part -- but it definitely puts him in a split personality kind of
>>>>position. Furthermore, I believe that he simply can't be as successful as he
>>>>might be creating only one book.
>>>>
>>>>Strange in my opinion. And difficult to understand.
>>>>
>>>>Djordje
>>>
>>>I don't think it has a thing to do with honesty. I'd never question
>>>Jeroen's honesty at all.
>>>
>>>It does have a lot to do with fairness. Bruce Moreland summed it up
>>>best: "why do I have to face the _same_ outstanding book twice in the
>>>same tournament when I don't ever face the same _program_ twice?"
>>>
>>>That's a good point. A good book can be a significant advantage. There
>>>are complaints if an amateur tries to use a commercial program's opening
>>>book. Why not if two different commercial entries try to use the same
>>>book?
>>
>>Of course not, Bob. Jeroen's honesty was never an issue. The guy's just OK and
>>nice to talk to. He's always contributed sensible stuff to the forum. It is a
>>question of: a. his ability to act as a different book maker for different
>>engines ("the split personality chess book maker syndrome"), and b. fairness to
>>other participants in a chess event (th point you made). It was not easy to
>>wiggle out of Jeroen's traps and tricks in Leiden, and I had luck (got 2/3
>>against his books, with a little luck on my side). But his books are, together
>>with Alex Kure's, worth perhaps 30-50 ELO for an engine.
>>
>>Djordje
>
>
>If Jeroen wrote three different books, and by different I mean _no common
>lines_ then I would not object. But I would bet that 90% of all 3 books is
>the same, if not 100%. And that is the part I don't like. Yes, his books
>are _always_ good. But do I _really_ have to face his book three (or more
>times if they add more engines) in the _same_ event?
>
>I think that was the main point Bruce made the last time this came up.
I think Bruce would have objected! After all, it's not like Bruce is allowed to
enter three different programs that he wrote.
Dave
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.