Author: Chessfun
Date: 20:06:08 10/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 30, 2003 at 22:43:24, Mike Byrne wrote: >On October 30, 2003 at 22:27:54, Chessfun wrote: > >>On October 30, 2003 at 22:21:39, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On October 30, 2003 at 17:58:29, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On October 30, 2003 at 17:10:25, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 30, 2003 at 14:32:08, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>>I don't understand why ChessMaster is allowed to use a Kure book (general.ctg) >>>>>>in the SSDF testing. >>>>>> >>>>>>Last time this happened (with Gromit) it was specifically said by Alex Kure >>>>>>that it was _not_ allowed to use the Fritz books to test anything other >>>>>>than Fritz. So why is ChessMaster using it now? Did Kure give permission >>>>>>(which I seriously doubt)? >>>>>> >>>>>>IMHO using the ChessBase learner for ChessMaster is also very questionable. >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>GCP >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I agree to both of your points. >>>>> >>>>>If Kure does not allow one of its books to be used, it is unfair to let CM9000 >>>>>use it. >>>>> >>>>>CM9000 is not a ChessBase product, so it is unfair to allow the engine to use >>>>>the ChessBase book learning system. >>>>> >>>>>Thank you for bringing it to our attention. I'm extremely surprised that the >>>>>SSDF guys do something that is clearly against the spirit of their list. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>> >>>>CM9000 is not a chessbase product but I think that the ssdf should be allowed to >>>>test every combination of engine, book and learning. >>>> >>>>After all the interesting question is what is the best thing that people can buy >>>>and if people can buy chessmaster together with Fritz book and get something >>>>better than it is important to know it. >>>> >>>>SSDF have not enough time to test every combination and this is the reason that >>>>they should prefer the programmer choice in case that he suggests something(I >>>>guess that in this case Johan suggested nothing so they are free to test it in >>>>the way that they want to do it) >>>> >>>>I think that book makers should not be allowed to forbid people to test their >>>>book with another program. >>>> >>>>They earn enough from not allowing other people to use their book in world >>>>championship or from the fact that people know that the ssdf leader used their >>>>book. >>>> >>>>Chessbase also can earn money if people know that the programmer chose to test >>>>chessmaster under chessbase because it means that people may buy both chessbase >>>>interface and chessmaster. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>> >>> >>>Come on, Uri... >>> >>>Maybe you hope that some day the same favor will be allowed for Movei? >>> >>>It's ridiculous. The spirit of the SSDF has always been to test the programs >>>"out of the box", unless the programmer himself suggests a change in the default >>>setup. >>> >>>Here it's not an "out of the box" program that is tested, because it cannot be >>>tested automatically. >>> >>>OK, I can understand that. >>> >>>But WHY would this program receive TWO UNFAIR ADVANTAGES? >> >> >>You seem to also have missed that this isn't the default CM9K but a modified >>settings version SKR. >> >>Also there are others programs which have been tested previously by the SSDF >>using a general.ctg from CB. Those programs tested also were not part of CB's >>stable. >> >>Sarah. >> > >I respectfully disagree. The rules were always "out of the box, best settings >by the author". Disagree with what?. I simply stated two facts. My opinion is that the default CM9K should be used, I just never stated it. Sarah. > >That should be CM9K STANDARD settings with the CM9K book. If the book is not >converted, I would go with the the CM8K book which is convertible. > >This whole concept of testing with the settings not supplied by the original >author is a bad precedent and should be abandoned immediately. In fact, if I >was a chess programmer I would dis-assocaiate my with SSDF program. If some >other orgaziation undera a different name wanted to test under these conditions >- that would be fine - but the SSDF ratings themselves should not be >contaiminated with less than optimal settings as defined by the original AUTHOR. > >Period. > > > >> >>>Why would the SSDF give an advantage when the author and the manufacturer of the >>>program in question have provided no help to solve the issues of the book and >>>the GUI??? >>> >>>If this is allowed now by the SSDF, I guess chess programmers do not have to >>>write an opening book. Just write an engine and send it to the SSDF, they will >>>add a GUI, book learning and a very strong opening book. >>> >>>In two years from now the Kure book will be standard and all the SSDF games will >>>end in a draw because all games will be Kure book against Kure book. >>> >>>Instead of giving CM9000 TWO unfair advantages it should: >>>* either not be tested at all >>>* or be tested without opening (and without book learning of course) >>> >>>What's the next step? "Dear SSDF, I have written a chess program that cannot >>>play the endgame, so please switch to Shredder when you reach the endgame stage. >>>Thank you." >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe
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.