Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 14:26:24 10/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 30, 2003 at 23:06:08, Chessfun wrote: >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. Sorry Sarah - I misread the post. > > >> >>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.