Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:03:19 03/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2004 at 12:29:14, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 01, 2004 at 11:54:15, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On March 01, 2004 at 11:25:33, Geert van der Wulp wrote: >> >>>On March 01, 2004 at 10:46:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On March 01, 2004 at 04:36:28, Geert van der Wulp wrote: >>>> >>>>The SSDF is a paid list which does not publish all the games they play. >>>> >>>>I do not say that they deliberately influence results, but we cannot check it. >>>>Just one SSDF tester seems to publish all games he played and is therefore a >>>>transparant tester. >>>> >>>>To get on the SSDF list within 1 list, the only way to garantuee that is by >>>>paying them 2 machines. >>>> >>>>That would make the entry fee for the world champs a lot higher. >>>> >>>>So please remove all ideas that link SSDF to ICGA. They are 2 independant >>>>organisations and i feel they should keep like that. >>>> >>>>>On March 01, 2004 at 03:36:11, Gerd Isenberg wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 29, 2004 at 21:49:41, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>The tournament format for WCCC that was originally decided was: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-------- >>>>>>>http://www.cs.unimaas.nl/icga/news/events/Israel/event.html >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The format for the 12th World Computer Chess Championship WCCC2004 will be: >>>>>>>5-round Swiss, after which the top 4 + 4 teams get to play a 2-round elimination >>>>>>>at each stage, and the bottom teams continue to compete for the 9th spot playing >>>>>>>a 6-round Swiss. >>>>>>>-------- >>>>>>> >>>>>>>However, since a large number of amateur programmers expressed their disapproval >>>>>>>of this system, we have decided to change the format so that it will attract the >>>>>>>largest number of programmers. Currently the two options are: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A) Like the original format, but with re-entry: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Divide the participants into two groups. Conduct 5 rounds Swiss, and top 4 from >>>>>>>each group (total of 8) will qualify for next stage, which will be a knockout (2 >>>>>>>rounds quarter-final, 2 rounds semi-final, 2 rounds final). The other programs >>>>>>>will continue with 6 more Swiss rounds. However, the *difference* is: the losers >>>>>>>in the knockout will join the other programs (who haven't qualified for knockout >>>>>>>phase) in continuing with additional Swiss rounds (with all the points they >>>>>>>scored in the first 5 rounds and in the knockout phase). >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The advantage of this method over the original one is that the amateurs will get >>>>>>>more chances of playing against commercial programs after the first 5 rounds. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>B) 11 rounds Swiss. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>In Graz WCCC everything was basically over after 7 rounds. The last 4 rounds >>>>>>>didn't change anything at all. That is the reason why we are trying to choose a >>>>>>>more exciting format. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>However, our primary goal is maximizing participation. So, if 11 rounds Swiss >>>>>>>will attract the largest number of participants, then we will opt for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We are interested in hearing your opinion, especially the opinion of programmers >>>>>>>who are considering participation in WCCC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Omid David Tabibi (davoudo@cs.biu.ac.il), >>>>>>>Bar-Ilan University. >>>>>> >>>>>>Hi Omid, >>>>>> >>>>>>I prefere option B) but i see the problem with 11 rounds if the number of >>>>>>participants if rather less, let say <= 16. Therefore my suggestion is to play 9 >>>>>>rounds only, which is also fine for 17..32 participants. >>>>>> >>>>>>Regards, >>>>>>Gerd >>>>> >>>>>Hello to all, >>>>> >>>>>Why will it not be a single or double all-play-all tournament? The (large?) >>>>>disadvantage is that if you want the tournament to be open for all programmers, >>>>>then it will be unclear how many rounds the tournament will have. >>>>> >>>>>On the other hand I believe that it is more fair (certainly a double >>>>>all-play-all tournament) than a Swiss Tournament in which one always has a >>>>>certain factor of pairing luck. In my opinion the double all-play-all will be >>>>>best. >>>>> >>>>>Maybe there is a way to limit the number of contestants. For example by allowing >>>>>a maximum of 12 or 15 participants only. The teams that want to compete will be >>>>>put on a list and only the highest 8 or 10 on the SSDF list are directly in the >>>>>main tournament. The others will play a preliminary tournament. >>>>> >>>>>Of course there are 2 other disadvantages to this system: >>>>>1) It will cost more money. >>>>>2) Strong programs that are not yet on the SSDF list, such as Shredder 8 would >>>>>not be placed directly. One can of course say that this is no problem because >>>>>the program will have to place itself via the preliminary tournament. But I >>>>>believe that this is not fair towards the others in the preliminary tournament. >>>>>They get a much stronger opponent than they "deserve". >>>>> >>>>>Maybe anyone has thoughts about this (or objections against it? :-)) >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>> >>>>>Geert >>> >>>Okay Vincent, >>> >>>Fair enough. We don't use the list of the SSDF. >>>Then in order to avoid having to play in the preliminary tournament one must >>>have participated in one of the previous WCCC tournaments. With this engine, or >>>an older version. >> >>That's exactly how the ICGA is drawing seeds. Seeded first is the current world >>champion, followed by vice world champion. After that ex world champs get seeded >>and after that with 11 rounds swiss it doesn't really matter too much, as you >>play against all strong participants usually. >> >>>Hmmm, I see how this can give difficulties as well. Because one could easily >>>name his new engine to be the successor of an engine that competed in the 1st or >>>2nd WCCC. Maybe it should be restricted to participants in the last 5 WCCC >>>championships. >> >>Practical there are no problems, because the reality in life is that everyone >>who makes just a 1% chance to win the world title, will join such an event, >>whatever the format. So your theroetic new engine has 0% chance to win anyway, >>if it would make even a small chance it would have joined already previous year >>or the year before. > >No > >This is your imagination and not the reality. > >The reality is that the winner of the computer world championship cannot expect >to earn much money thanks to it and from money calculation it is a bad deal to I estimate it at about 10000 copies sold. It is indeed not so much if you compare it to other games. Kasparov is worth i guess about 2 million copies (FOR CHESSBASE, not necessarily for junior who did 0 to sell their software outside Israel after playing Kasparov). You will find Fritz after this match in about every other supermarket now. Aldi even sells a fritz8 for 4.99 euro a copy. In any case it is very important for commercial software to put something at the box where they are best at. People just kick on winners. You yourself are the best example. Other games that get sold sell millions of copies a year so compared to that, computerchess is absolute penauts. In short for chessbase there are huge reasons to go to the world champs. Even if "Absolute world champion computerchess who challenged Kasparov as seen at ESPN" at their box sells 1% more, it is already another 10000 copies extra. Converting that to money is hard, because fritz is there for 4.99 euro in Aldi up to 46 euro for full fritz8 up to 100 euro or so for deepfritz8. >go to the championship if you think your chances are only 1% So going to world champs for commercial engines is very interesting even with 1% chance. For Hydra the interesting thing is to win, in order to after that join matches against strong human grandmasters. See their homepage hydrachess.com clearly announcing this implicitly already. For this reason i garantuee you that world champs 2004 there will show up for sure: Fritz, Shredder, Hydra, Junior. I guess the other Israeli engines show up too, you can answer that yourself best: Movei, Falcon. So we have 6 confirmed participants, if you confirm you join. I will take a definitive decision after ict4, and i definitely will consider 1% as the border limit to join there. If i have less than 1% chance to win there, chances of seeing me there will get smaller. The tournament winner in case of knockout will be the program that's best in rapid chess and i predict that will be a program of Arab nationality, because hardware advantage is important in rapid chess. 15 seconds a move at current hardware is faster level than 3 minutes a move at a quad xeon in 1999 was. For the same reason i prefer a swiss setup instead of the knockout stress. I have seen several commercial programmers play knockouts now and i have played myself several knockouts in my own chess careers. The commercial programmers just cannot handle the stress of it (with exception of the junior team, they are always at 100% "winning comes first" mentality, so they seem more adjusted to knockout than the other teams). Most 'amateurs' are simply not physically nor mentally capable of handling the stress during knockout. Well perhaps with exception of the Falcon and Jonny programmer because both of them are chess players and very cool guys. But all those typical programmers who never compete in tournaments at a high level and then suddenly play in a world championship, they do not know how to act from stress. Usual the nicest people are the worst to play knockout against. I'm sure for example that Chrilly nor Frans will be able to operate their own program in a knockout. Lucky for them they do not need to operate it, they both have operators who can handle the stress way better (no one ever mentions Mathias but he is a very good guy to play against when operating Fritz). Even worse under stress are other real nice guys like GCP and Dieter and when i play i play for a win always too. When after a 11 round swiss tournament therefore 2 programs are divided first and play a tie who is world champion, that's more than enough knockout in a world championship computerchess. The computerchess is just too full with chessprogrammers who love to win but do not know anything from how to act during a tournament, as they do not join any form of competition at a (semi-)professional level where also only the point counts. No one adressed this point yet and i sure hope it remains a theoretic point. Most likely the world champs 2004 will be a half round robin anyway. >people do not do things only for money reasons so there are participants with 1% >chance and even less than it but not everybody does it. > >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.