Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Most brilliant novelty from cct7 Witchess-Arasan

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 12:20:31 02/16/05

Go up one level in this thread

On February 16, 2005 at 13:58:21, Arturo Ochoa wrote:

>On February 14, 2005 at 19:56:56, Uri Blass wrote:
>>On February 14, 2005 at 19:23:07, Thomas Mayer wrote:
>>>Hi Arturo,
>>>> I did not tune the book against Movei.... I tune a book for a specific
>>>> engine. Anthony accepted my help and I did my best in 2 short months. Of
>>>> course, how could you understand that?
>>>we had that discussion already in several forums. Uri has his point of view
>>>(which is IMO totally wrong) and will not change that... senseless to discuss...
>>>You might remember CCT4 -> Since then I had never again such a fantastic tuned
>>>book for Quarks needs - it was the work of Leo Dijksman which he had done in
>>>several month with thousands of games and analysis. Of course it was Quark which
>>>was playing that tourney but it had a fantastic book that lead it to positions
>>>it can play. And that is what a good book cooker should do, he should help the
>>>engine to end up in positions after the opening where it knows what it should
>>>do. The more time he can spent on that the better it will do.
>>>Vincencts 700 Elo might be a bit to high, but 300 is for sure a good number -
>>>the difference between a random book and a well tuned book. Especially the
>>>weaker or more unbalanced your engine is, the more it is important to have a
>>>perfect book.
>>It suggests that the engine is important because if the engine is not balanced
>>you may solve the problem by doing it balance.
>Every component of software is important including the book.
>> Maybe for a weak engine even Vincents 700 is possible...
>>I think that if the engine is too weak no book will help it unless you predict
>>perfectly the opoenent moves.
>>I do not see how you can do tscp 700 elo better by a book and tscp is not the
>>weakest engine in the world.
>>I guess that a book for weaker engines will be even less productive.
>How do you know that? What are you proofs? You only guess  and how can you
>support this?
>>If someone want to prove me wrong he is invited to try to improve tscp rating of
>>1699 in the WBEC site to 2400(slightly better than Amateur,Betsy,Leila)
>>The rating should hold also against new opponents(that were still not released)
>>because when I talk about book the idea is not to have killer book that work
>>only against specific opponents with known books that is of course possible
>>after lot of work when you put win after win in the book.
>No, you are not so important so somebody wastes his valuable time in your absurd
>contrdictions. :) It is enough to point your nonsense here.
>What you dont tunderstand is the Vincent's sense. Because your lack of
>credibility, he just put a extreme point. You think that a no-book engine can
>wint a Title.Prove that in Tournaments.

I did not say that my engine can do it so there is nothing that I need to prove.
I never claimed that movei can win a title.

I do not think that it can do it today and even if I will think sometimes in the
future that it can do it I plan to say nothing about it before it wins.


This page took 0.03 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.