Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Technical question regarding interface for CCT

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 13:57:26 12/14/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 14, 2003 at 09:13:12, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>On December 14, 2003 at 08:52:57, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On December 14, 2003 at 07:17:13, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>
>>>On December 14, 2003 at 00:02:46, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>
>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 19:15:00, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 19:02:23, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 18:29:42, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 18:12:17, Russell Reagan wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On December 13, 2003 at 05:31:25, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Well, if without Chessbase engines you'll have a better event and make progress,
>>>>>>>>>I won't stand in your way.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Your statement sounds like the people who tried to hold on to DOS too long when
>>>>>>>>Windows (and other multitasking operating systems) were clearly the future.
>>>>>>>>"Well, if without real mode you'll have better programs and make progress, I
>>>>>>>>won't stand in your way." You don't hear too many of those people these days. Is
>>>>>>>>Ed Schröder the only one left? :) Clearly, multiuser and multitasking operating
>>>>>>>>systems are progress over DOS.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>45 participants is a heck of a lot more than 14. If there are 40 participants
>>>>>>>>instead, that's still a heck of a lot more than 14, with plenty of strong
>>>>>>>>competition. If we had this kind of participation along with the Chessbase
>>>>>>>>engines, that would be great, but I'll take 40+ participants with no Chessbase
>>>>>>>>participants over 14 including Chessbase participants.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>What was the average rating in Graz? What is the average rating in CCT?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>By this logic the tournament would have been even better with only Shredder,
>>>>>>Junior and Fritz.
>>>>>>The others just dragged down the rating, obviously.
>>>>>
>>>>>OK, let me put it this way: how many top programs participated in Graz? How many
>>>>>will participate in CCT?
>>>>>
>>>>>Having a chess championship without Junior/Fritz/Shredder is like having a
>>>>>football worldcup without Brazil, Italy, Germany, England... (and if like CCT
>>>>>you don't have any "drug tests", then Argentina will easily win, thanks to
>>>>>Maradona :)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>If quantity is the only important factor for you, then you can take 100 free
>>>>>>>winboard engines, run a tournament on your computer, and crown the winner with
>>>>>>>the world champion title.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Quantity is important, quantity means support, interest and recognition.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Where was Tiger, where was Rebel, Ruffian, SmarThink, Crafty, Yace... in your
>>>>>>little shootout?
>>>>>
>>>>>Had they thought they had any chance to win the championship, they would have
>>>>>shown up.
>>>>
>>>>That statement is so far beyond stupid...  it really doesn't deserve a
>>>>response.  Drop over to ICC tonight or tomorrow night, try the quad opteron
>>>>Crafty on for size in a game or two.  Then come back and make that statement.
>>>>It's been hitting 9M+ nodes per second and is _not_ a pushover.
>>>
>>>Brutus has been hitting 20M+ nodes per second in Graz, so what?
>>>
>>>
>>>>I could
>>>>probably have shown up with a 16-way machine at the very least.  Do you _really_
>>>>think it would have no chance?  :)
>>>
>>>It is up to you to think about your chances. Had you thought you had real
>>>chances, you would have shown up.
>>>
>>>Again, Brutus had a far better evaluation than Crafty, far better search, and
>>>far better nps, and it only ended 4th.
>>
>>How do you know that brutus had better evaluation
>
>?!?
>I saw the evaluations.
>
>
>>and better search than crafty?
>>
>
>Search depth, branching factor... Crafty's search and evaluation hasn't changed
>much in the recent years.
>
>
>
>>>
>>>On the same hardware, Falcon never scores less than 80% against Crafty, and it
>>>only ended 10th.
>>
>>Did you test against 19.06 and not 19.03?(results that I read suggest that 19.06
>>is an improvement)
>
>How much improvement? 1% speedup? 2% speedup? 5% speedup? But the same search
>and evaluation I guess.

You should stop guessing.  I _know_.

What better source than to ask???


>
>
>>Did you test with own books and not with Fritz8.ctg?
>
>I don't think it will matter. You use your own books to direct the engine into
>positions it plays well. Against Crafty, Falcon has no problems in any kind of
>position. (This is not true for Junior for example. In the last test, Falcon
>beat Junior 4.5-1.5, but I don't think this difference of strength will hold
>true if I test Junior using its tournament book.)

Please feel free to come to ICC and demonstrate such outright and overwhelming
superiority.  Programs like Shredder, Junior, Tiger, etc are _not_ beating me
80% of the time.

It is much easier to actually run the experiment than to guess...

I'm always available...


>
>
>>
>>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.