Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Diep and Falcon #2 and 3

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 14:54:52 05/02/04

Go up one level in this thread


On May 02, 2004 at 17:29:44, Dave Gomboc wrote:

>On May 02, 2004 at 15:58:38, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On May 02, 2004 at 15:05:08, Dave Gomboc wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>It's the world championship.  It has a 30-year pedigree.  Sure, it's not as
>>>>>>>scientifically valid as the SSDF list.  Nonetheless, it is the most important
>>>>>>>computer chess event on the planet, bar none.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Dave
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Sorry, but this is wrong.  Last time there were 16 participants.  Last CCT had
>>>>>>over 50.  I'll take the over 50...
>>>>>
>>>>>You're ignoring the quality of the participants.
>>>>>
>>>>>Dave
>>>>
>>>>Let's see.  CCT had junior.  New hiarcs.  Crafty on a monster machine.
>>>>Ruffian.  I'd take the top 8 from the last CCT and compare them against
>>>>the top 8 of the last WCCC....  Quality was very high at CCT6 too...
>>>
>>>If you're only going to look at the top eight, then the "50" doesn't mean much,
>>>does it?
>>
>>Actually it does.  You mentioned quality.  Quality is at the top.  Quantity is
>>where the top and bottom are farther apart.
>>
>>The bottom of the WCCC was no better than the bottom of the CCT
>
>There are enough games at the WCCC that everyone with a chance in hell gets to
>play at least three of the top four programs.  Consequently. there's less
>variability in the results at the top.

Same thing was true at CCT.  Nobody slipped into the top without playing
everyone up there.  Anything beyond 6 rounds makes that unlikely...



  I also think the average strength of
>WCCC was considerably higher than that of CCT-6.  Besides, quantity doesn't mean
>much when you're trying to select a champion.

I didn't notuce the WCCC being "selective".  They took what they could get,
which wasn't many..




>
>>, but CCT had a
>>+lot+ more players between the top and bottom.  I think it is a tougher
>>competition without the too-many-rounds-for-the-number-of-players-blues seen at
>>the WCCC...
>
>Again, I disagree.  The tournament with Shredder and Fritz in it is tougher (to
>win), period.
>

I thinnk Hiarcs, Junior, the King, etc are _just_ as tough...





>>> Most of those 50 have rather little against the top engines.
>>>(Nonetheless, I think it's great that the strength variety in that tournament is
>>>wide enough that everyone has a chance to win at least a couple of games.  It
>>>sounds like a fun event, and if I had a chess program, I'd probably play it in
>>>CCT too.)
>>>
>>>As you correctly point out, the top of the field at CCT-6 was reasonably strong.
>>> However, the top of the field at WCCC '03 was stronger -- and the top of the
>>>field at WCCC '04 will be stronger again.
>>
>>>WCCC '03 top finishers: 9.5/11 Shredder, Fritz, 9/11 Junior, 8.5/11 Brutus, 6/11
>>>Green Light, Diep.
>>
>>Top of CCT6 had hiarcs, Junior, crafty (quad opteron), zappa, to name just 4
>>that are very tough.  I suspect if you have a tournament with those 8 programs,
>>_anything_ could happen.  Either group, any program, could have won....
>
>Keep reading...
>
>>>CCT-6 top finishers: 7/9 Crafty, Hiarcs, Zappa, 6.5/9 Junior, Ruffian, King of
>>>Kings.
>
>I did include those in my message. ;-)
>
>
>>>Also, IIRC, Junior at CCT-6 != Junior at WCCC: at CCT they weren't able to use
>>>their normal opening book due to the automated restriction (some proprietary
>>>data format incompatibility issue).
>>>
>>>It'd be nice to see Crafty at the WCCC.  Is there some chance of getting
>>>someone who will be attending to operate it?
>>
>>A few years ago they changed the rules to make that impossible.
>
>:-(  Well, I still don't understand why it's impossible to get a week away from
>classes.  Most professors here just find substitute lecturers.  Mind you, I see
>from UAB's CS home page that the department is not all that large, which could
>make it harder to find subs.


First, look at the event.  It is not "a week".  It takes 2 weeks.  Not doable.

As far as subs, make that Impossible for the most part...

>
>>They then
>>chose to not enforce the rule later, but when you think about it, who really
>>cares nowadays.  CCT had almost 4x the players.  From a wider international
>>group of participants.  I think it will do just fine...
>
>Whatever floats your boat. :-(
>
>Dave

It isn't what "floats my boat".  It is "what will sink the ECCA boat."  They are
making the bad decisions...




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.