Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:47:03 11/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2003 at 15:41:05, Matthew Hull wrote: >On November 20, 2003 at 15:27:33, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On November 20, 2003 at 14:55:37, Matthew Hull wrote: >> >>>On November 20, 2003 at 14:23:10, Amir Ban wrote: >>> >>>>On November 20, 2003 at 08:59:25, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 20, 2003 at 06:57:30, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 18:12:12, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 17:30:36, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 12:02:56, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:51:59, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:34:17, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:30:37, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:06:21, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:55:26, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:31:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>here. Makes a _lot_ of sense. And it shows just how "world" aware the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>ICCA actually is. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>i don't really want to be involved in this thread, but i can't resist this >>>>>>>>>>>>>>one... >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>disclaimer: of course it would be much more sensible to have the championship in >>>>>>>>>>>>>>the US from time to time. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>cheapo: so the ICCA does something which is not good for *one* country >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>That's one cheapo that doesn't work. It would be like 2000 years ago holding >>>>>>>>>>>>>gladiator events that discommode only one country, Rome. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>MH >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>of course it works, and you just invite the next follow up cheapo ;-) >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>2000 years ago the romans were perhaps not aware that there was much more to the >>>>>>>>>>>>world than rome. sometimes one gets the feeling that the US citizens are no >>>>>>>>>>>>different in this respect... >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Ok, how about holding a world chess championship that only inconviences >>>>>>>>>>>Russians. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I think you get the idea. :) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>MH >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>of course i get the idea! i put a disclaimer on my first post stating clearly >>>>>>>>>>that IMO the championship should be held in the US from time to time, and i >>>>>>>>>>labelled my posts as cheapos :-) >>>>>>>>>>i thought that made it clear enough... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>going back to your comparison with the russians: exactly how many american >>>>>>>>>>programs are in the top 10 of the SSDF list? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>The SSDF list only uses consumer-grade technology to test programs. Programs >>>>>>>>>tuned to that limited technology will always top that list. That is why the >>>>>>>>>list is of limited importance. A real WCCC is going to attract high performance >>>>>>>>>projects, not just consumer oriented projects. This is what the New World has >>>>>>>>>always offered. But, Old Worlders have a problem with that I guess. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Do any such New World high performance projects exist ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Crafty can be such a project on practically a moment's notice (I believe). >>>>>>>Other programs are similiarly suited. If the WCCC comes to North America, the >>>>>>>projects will materialize. This was the benefit of limiting the event to every >>>>>>>three years and making it a practical event, length-wise. It provided time for >>>>>>>the husbanding of resources, planning, development and sponsorship along with a >>>>>>>relative rarity that made the event that much more important and compelling (and >>>>>>>thus an easier sell to the people with the expensive resources). >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The current cycle with it's awkward timing and extended length, along with it's >>>>>>>persistent location in Europe (not to mention its archaic modus operendi) seems >>>>>>>calculated to favor European commercial interests while excluding projects from >>>>>>>North America. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Perhaps it is the punishment Europeans are determined to mete out to us for the >>>>>>>DB2 triumph, which seems to be universally reviled overseas. EU types are maybe >>>>>>>fed up with the dominance of North American, high-end computer chess projects. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>There's nothing to be fed up with, since the dominance is long gone. >>>>> >>>>>Yes, the ICGA have seen to that by keeping the WCCC out of North America and >>>>>making inconvenient for North Americans to participate. Nicely done, IMO. >>>>> >>>>>>Hong Kong >>>>>>1995 was the swansong. There were 4 of them there, but losing to Fritz, and even >>>>>>before that, in 1992, to Schroeder, underscored that they have lost their >>>>>>advantage and so their reason in life. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>That is a not entirely unreasonable opinion, though still incorrect, IMO. Bob >>>>>addressed the competitive issue in another thread here. There are American >>>>>programs suited to high performance hardware which would have a definite >>>>>advantage, even over your project. Yes? >>>>> >>>> >>>>Sure. There are tens if not hundreds of Americans who would make me look silly >>>>with multi-million $ projects and $10 million hardware. The only thing holding >>>>them back is that they can't afford to go to Europe. >>> >>>As has been stated already, it's not just travel, but duration and timing >>>(Thanksgiving? Huge US holiday.) as well, which are departures from the classic >>>events. >>> >>> >>>> >>>>It has been tested once in a Rebel vs. Crafty match where Crafty was given a 100 >>>>to 1 time advantage. The match was aborted after Rebel won the first game. >>> >>> >>>Look a crafty on ICC, with barely a 2x hardware advantage it goes toe-to-toe >>>with Rebel, Shredder, Tiger, etc. None of those programs dominate crafty. So >>>your "friendly" _little_ jibe is demonstrated to be bogus. ;) >> >> >>ICC is mainly blitz. >> >>Longer time control help the stronger programs. > > >The CCT history suggest commercial advantages are not that large. GCP already >told Bob he did not want to play a match with Crafty on Opteron 4-way. If >Crafty or Ferret shows up somewhere on a 32-way or higher, are you going to put >your money on a commercial entry? > >I didn't think so. I expect Crafty18.15 not to lead the ssdf even if it gets hardweare that is 6 time faster than A1200 The gap between Crafty and Shredder7.04 is 197 elo and even the optimistic prediction of 70 elo per doubling the speed do not give it 197 elo. I expect Crafty18.15 to get better rating than shredder7.04 in case that it gets hardware that is 6 times faster if the games are done at 1 minute/40 moves. If you use better hardware than A1200 and 120/40 or something close to it that is done in the world championship then I expect Crafty to lose even with hardware advantage of 10:1 > > >> >>You can find that Crafty against GNuchess with significantly better hardware >>lose at blitz but does better at long time control. >> >>I guess that same is going to happen to the opposite direction if you try Crafty >>against the top commercial programs. > > >Should be easy enough to test on ICC with willing participants. And maybe Rebel >and Crafty meet in CCT6. > >MH CCT6 is more than twice faster than 120/40 and rebel is not the best commercial program. Uri
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.