Author: Christopher Conkie
Date: 04:35:48 06/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hello Uri, You math may be right but probability and reality are two different things. Any advantage can transpire in any one game, maybe all, maybe never. If it does and it is the decisive game, then it is a problem. For example if you have a roulette wheel and say that because a certain number has not come up for a while, it is more likely, that is a false assumption. It may never come up ever again. An advantage is an advantage however and it may show itself at any point so..... Best if in something as serious as WCCC 2005 that all programs use the same software, protocols, hardware and then there can be no thought of bias or advantage. There should be a hardware spec and a software spec. Engines should be made with this in mind and then and only then do you have a fair championship and a true reflection of the abilities of a programmers engine. They play with books and tablebases at WCCC 2005. You have got to be kidding me on. If I want to see a human GM game I should go and watch human GM's play. Why I should have to see computers play human moves in a computer chess tournament is way beyond my comprehension. It is the evaluation that should win the WCCC not anything else. In eval terms and on a level playing field, I totally agree with you that under the same conditions it is highly likely that Shredder may win. Don't worry no more long threads, I think the point was made successfully yesterday. Probability is a guide, reality is the truth. Christopher
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.