Author: Arturo Ochoa
Date: 12:29:39 08/07/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2005 at 10:18:45, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 07, 2005 at 06:02:06, Arturo Ochoa wrote: > >>On August 06, 2005 at 23:57:41, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 06, 2005 at 21:06:12, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>> >>>>On August 06, 2005 at 19:43:46, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 06, 2005 at 14:22:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 06, 2005 at 13:44:50, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On August 06, 2005 at 09:19:48, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On August 06, 2005 at 03:07:59, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 20:20:57, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 17:42:17, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 14:40:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 12:04:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 11:40:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 11:03:10, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 05, 2005 at 07:40:55, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 04, 2005 at 13:38:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 04, 2005 at 07:49:10, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>On August 04, 2005 at 07:15:02, Engin Üstün wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>what is about the intelligence of the program? i mean the knowledge of the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>program ? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Well the competition in that respect has been closed already, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>as diep has more chessevaluation knowledge than any other program. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>That ought to be worth a "post of the year" award. "the competition is closed". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> :) Just like the question "can a cluster be used to play chess?" The answer >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>was (at first) "No, I can proof that the latencies are too high and the speedup >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>can't be > 1.0". It was later "yes, everyone else has tried and failed, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Diep can use a cluster now." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>that gets _so_ old to continually read such crap. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Why is it that the program "with more chessevaluation knowledge than any other >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>program" can't win a major tournament with the regularity of the inferior >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>programs like Shredder and Junior? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Go figure... >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Are you suggesting that Shredder has less evaluation knowledge than Crafty? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Go away. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>No >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bob Hyatt never said that Crafty has more knowledge. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Shredder has *way* more than you realize. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Junior9 has way way more knowledge than older versions. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>The proof is obvious that chessknowledge works. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Bob never said that chess knowledge does not work. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>By the way, has your 2000 line evaluation function "enough to get world >>>>>>>>>>>>>>champion" already finished? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Vincent >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>No but I think that fruit's evaluation with better search and good book is >>>>>>>>>>>>>enough to win the world championship. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>How many lines are in fruit2.1's evaluation? >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Fruit eval.cpp has a less than 2000 lines >>>>>>>>>>>>>There are functions like piece_attack_king not in eval.cpp but on the other >>>>>>>>>>>>>side there are empty lines and asserts and comments in eval.cpp so I am not sure >>>>>>>>>>>>>if Fruit's evaluation is more than 2000 lines. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>What happened to all your complaining in the 2004 world championship about >>>>>>>>>>>>others having superior hardware (the reason you gave why Movei lost from Diep, >>>>>>>>>>>>remember?). Fruit is single cpu. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I admit that Fruit is simply better than Movei. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>About the game against Diep the tactical mistake that costed the game is a >>>>>>>>>>>mistake that movei could avoid with better hardware. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I am not sure what result Movei could do with better hardware against Diep but >>>>>>>>>>>Diep could not win easily. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Crafty is quad opteron dual core, so is diep (quad opteron dual core 1.8Ghz >>>>>>>>>>>>sponsor: www.hotels.nl ), shredder quad opteron dual core 2.2Ghz minimum >>>>>>>>>>>>(transtec) and probably Junior (HP) be too. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Did you forget all your "superior hardware always wins" complaints in 2004? >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Vincent >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I do not say that better hardware always win but I am almost sure that Movei >>>>>>>>>>>could score better with better hardware(for example it had good chances for a >>>>>>>>>>>draw against Crafty and in WBEC Movei beated Crafty in the match between them) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>I also think that there are good chances that movei could avoid the loss against >>>>>>>>>>>isichess with better hardware and the mistake that costed it the game could be >>>>>>>>>>>prevented with searching one ply deeper. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Uri >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>There are two facts: Diep beated you in WCC2004 and Zappa beated you in CCT7 in >>>>>>>>>>a easy way. The rest is mere cheap excuses typical from your Pre-WCCC frustrated >>>>>>>>>>non participation. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I only read this message. Not time to argue your nonsense for now. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Arturo. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>PD: I was the booker for this engines in those Tournaments. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I responded to vincent and I did not talk about the game against zappa and I do >>>>>>>>>not understand why you mention it. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>I also wrote nothing against you in my posts. >>>>>>>>>It is a fact that Movei could avoid the losing mistake with searching one ply >>>>>>>>>deeper against diep and that better hardware could help it to get one ply deeper >>>>>>>>>in the relevant position(probably hardware that is 1.5 times faster was enough >>>>>>>>>for it). >>>>>>>>>It is not something personal against you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>It is not a fact because It did not happen. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The fact is Movei made an awful mistake. Sooner or later it would make other >>>>>>>>mistake like this, so the result was going to be the same thing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It is possible that you are right that later it could make another losing >>>>>>>mistake and I do not know it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It is a fact that when I analyzed the game I found that movei could play a >>>>>>>better move with searching one ply deeper because analyzing the game later is >>>>>>>something that happened. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Uri >>>>>> >>>>>>You probably didn't see it, but i didn't comment in the idiocy you wrote about >>>>>>the Movei-Diep game. >>>>>> >>>>>>Any other move still loses you the game however. >>>>>> >>>>>>The fact is you just complained about hardware at the time. Now for the 2005 >>>>>>world champ suddenly hardware is not relevant. >>>>> >>>>>I did not say that it is not relevant and I do not expect fruit to win the >>>>>title. >>>>> >>>>>I said that it is better than Movei. >>>>> >>>> >>>>A lot better. >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>You did not explain that weird logic. >>>>>> >>>>>>To explain it in a way a child understands: >>>>>> >>>>>>It is not logic to say in 2004 that bigger hardware would have solved everything >>>>>>for you and that it was the only reason for you to lose, >>>>> >>>>>I did not say that it could solve everything for me but it could help me to get >>>>>more points. >>>>> >>>>>Movei was never strong enough to win WCCC. >>>> >>>>Thank you. You give me again the reason about Movei making all kind of mistakes >>>>later. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>whereas now you say Fruit makes a chance for world champion title despite >>>>>>that it is at a single cpu and many others are 4 to 8 cores. >>>>> >>>>>I think that the probability of Fruit2.1 to win the title is small >>>>> >>>>>Shredder,Junior and Zappa that support more than one processor have better >>>>>chances and Fruit is an easy target to prepare because Fruit2.1 is free and I >>>>>understood that Fabien did not work on improving it before WCCC and he said that >>>>>he took a break from chess programming after releasing Fruit2.1 so no big >>>>>improvement from Fruit2.1 is expected in WCCC(big improvement from Fruit2.1 will >>>>>probably happen only later). >>>> >>>>The probability compared to Movei is a lot big. >>>> >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>It is your turn to explain your logics. >>>>>> >>>>>>For the other readers, note that i would be happy if Fruit wins the world title; >>>>>>it tends to get predictable if each year junior or shredder wins. >>>>>> >>>>>>Vincent >>>>> >>>>>Note that my guess was that zappa is going to win the title. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>Why not the other participants? Based on what you supposed that? This is the >>>>typical Blah-Blah supposition before WCC2005?!!! :))) >>> >>>I know that Zappa already won the CCT title and I know that zappa surprised in >>>the past by almost winning CCT with a random book. >>> >>>I guess that you already did some preperations against specific opponents like >>>you did against Pharaon in the past and I do not expect always Shredder and >>>Junior to win the title. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>Correction: The Zappa Book for CCT was not _random_. > >I used the word random not for the zappa book that you were responsible for(last >CCT) but about the book in a previous CCT when zappa shared first place with 7/9 >and lost in the playoff(Crafty had superior hardware and won that CCT). > >If I remember correctly I read the word random directly from the author. > >Uri You did not refer to a specific CCT Tournament. Then, I corrected your misinformation. A8A
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.