Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I recommend two group of winners for next year !

Author: Matthew Hull

Date: 11:51:35 07/13/04

Go up one level in this thread


On July 13, 2004 at 14:24:42, Omid David Tabibi wrote:

>On July 13, 2004 at 13:22:04, steven blincoe wrote:
>
>>>
>>>To avoid any further disadvantage for the single processor programs, I
recommend >>>two group of winners for next year!
>>>
>>>
>>>Trophies for the SMP programs         And for the single processor programs
>>>         First group                            Second group
>>>
>>>     1st  Deep Junior                         1st  Jonny
>>>     2nd  Shredder                            2nd  Falcon
>>>     3rd  Diep                                3rd  IsiChess
>>
>>
>>it seems to me that common sense would dictate that the hardware to be used
is >>uniform for all entrants
>>
>>
>>even if this means certain progs cannot be entered
>
>I think the best would be to switch to the old WCCC and WMCCC formats of two
>events. WMCCC taking place annually, and WCCC once every few years. The WMCCC
>hardware rule could be very simple: every participant has to run on the
machines >provided by the organization, as Stefan Meyer-Kahlen suggested.
>
>If this year's event was held with uniform hardware, most probably Junior and
>Shredder would have still finished in the top two positions. But everything
>could have happened for other programs. For example, on equal hardware Falcon
>would have certainly won that game against Crafty, and most probably also the
>game against Diep (or at least would draw that game), which would have
resulted >in ending in the 3rd place.
>
>Speaking for myself, I will almost certainly participate with a parallel
system >next year. Otherwise I would simply not join. Playing against programs
running >on hardware at least four times faster than yours, borders on
masochism. It is >like running on equal hardware with one side having 2 hours
for 60 moves, and >the other having 8 hours for the same number of moves.



Computer chess is about a basic question of intellectual curiosity.  Limiting
hardware in the quest for the answer is mind-numbingly wrong.


The "contest" is fun, but not it's not ultimately about equipment or
algorithms.  It's about the answer to the basic question of the problem of
chess.

All this talk about uniform hardware just fails on so many levels, and changes
the subject of what computer chess is all about.  Think about it.


The championship used to played on nothing but big hardware, and now that cheap
little hardware is ubiquitous, you want to limit it to little hardware.  That
is just utterly ridiculous.


>
>
>>
>>otherwise we are comparing apples witn oranges
>>
>>
>>in an effort to include programs not written to run on standard computers,we
>>wind up with results heavily impacted by the different hardware being used
>>
>>
>>its as if the cure is worse then the disease
>>
>>Steve



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.