Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Conclusion(Amir Ban,Christophe Theron please respond)

Author: Omid David Tabibi

Date: 15:20:09 12/30/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 30, 2003 at 17:55:29, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:

>On December 30, 2003 at 17:21:58, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>
>>On December 30, 2003 at 15:31:55, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:
>>
>>>On December 30, 2003 at 15:20:34, Omid David Tabibi wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>>But tournaments where people are allowed to use any hardware they can find
>>>>>(non-uniform platform tournaments) are a pure nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I completely agree with this. What is the point of program X running on a 2.4
>>>>GHz machine against program Y which is running on a Quad? Does the result show
>>>>that program Y has better eval? better search? Nothing. It just shows that
>>>
>>>The point is to find the winner of the combination hardware+software.
>>>In other words, the top chess machine. It is not a software competition.
>>
>>You can be the best horse trainer in the world, but if you are given a donkey,
>>you will never win any race. The the only way to focus on horse training is to
>>provide everyone with a horse or with a donkey. The current system is a horse vs
>>donkey race.
>
>Don't choose a donkey if you train horses.

Not everyone can afford a horse...

But in 2004 I will certainly join with a dual horse :)


>
>Miguel
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>program Y can run over its opponent like a freight train. I think WMCCC events
>>>>will be more interesting and more meaningful from a scientific point of view.
>>>
>>>If there is science in building algorithms, there is some science in building
>>>hardware for chess too.
>>>
>>>Anyway, I will leave the word science out because any of these tournaments are
>>>more about sport. The important thing is the competition.
>>>
>>>Miguel



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.