Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: ACM1994

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 09:59:03 09/20/05

Go up one level in this thread


On September 20, 2005 at 11:58:35, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On September 20, 2005 at 02:35:50, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>
>>On September 18, 2005 at 14:47:26, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On September 18, 2005 at 14:38:27, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On September 18, 2005 at 13:59:18, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On September 18, 2005 at 12:00:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On September 18, 2005 at 10:45:19, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>># Name 1 2 3 4 5 P BU SB G
>>>>>>1 Deep Thought II 2w1  5b0  7w1  3b1  5b1  4  13½ 11  5
>>>>>>2 Zarkov          1b0  6b1  4w1  5b=  3w1  3½ 15  9¾ 5
>>>>>>3 Star Socrates   10w1 7b1  5w1  1w0  2b0  3  12½ 5  5
>>>>>>4 Now             6w=  10b= 2b0  8w1  9b1  3  10½ 5½ 5
>>>>>>5 Mchess Pro      8b1  1w1  3b0  2w=  1w0  2½ 16½ 7¾ 5
>>>>>>6 Cray Blitz      4b=  2w0  9w1  7b0  10w1 2½ 11  4  5
>>>>>>7 Wchess 9w1      3w0  1b0  6w1  8b0       2  13½ 4½ 5
>>>>>>8 Evaluator       5w0  9b0  10w1 4b0  7w1  2  10  2½ 5
>>>>>>9 Innovation II   7b0  8w1  6b0  10b1 4w0  2  10  2½ 5
>>>>>>10 Spector        3b0  4w=  8b0  9w0  6b0  ½ 12½ 1½ 5
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Zarkov from those days had no problems beating your 3 million nps Cray Blitz.
>>>>>>Nor had Wchess problems beating your 3 million nps Cray Blitz.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Ask John about the game.  First, this was a 500K program for rounds 2-4.  And
>>>>>when you ask him, he'll tell you about our rather severe crash problem due to a
>>>>>missing test to limit ply to 64 or less.  And in a couple of cute places, we
>>>>>went beyond that limit, crashed, and burned.  We fixed it for the last round,
>>>>>but it really didn't matter to the final results.
>>>>>
>>>>>But notice the issue was about deep thought, _not_ about Cray Blitz.  Did you
>>>>>see any of the micros coming close?  (hint:  round 2 was a forfeit which is why
>>>>>they were paired a second time, round 2 never got started for the DT MCP game).
>>>>
>>>>Deep Thought was significantly better than the micro of 1995
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>I am well aware of that.  And DB was 100x faster than deep thought 2, and also
>>>had a better evaluation...
>>>
>>>that was my point in all this...
>>
>>I think that Hsu is a pretty arrogant person, after having read some stuff that
>>he has said about himself and other chess programmers.
>>
>>Read his book, if you can stand it.
>
>I did.  It didn't particularly turn me off.  But then I have had dozens of
>face-to-face conversations with him dating back to 1987 in Orlando at the ACM
>event that year, continuing thru the point where he left IBM a few years back.
>
>>
>>For years you have taken a few things he has said as truth, but given his
>>personality I am not sure if they are true.  He may think they are, but this
>>doesn't mean that they are.
>
>That is probably all in perception.  I took very little of what he said at face
>value, without supporting evidence.  He was usually more than happy to sit down
>with deep thought and play with positions to see how it would react.  And he
>never wanted to "hide" the display so I could not see.  I didn't trust the SE
>data, since they gave conflicting reports on the effect (was it +70 or +7 rating
>points better) so I simply tried it for myself in Cray Blitz.  And I think that
>+7 was closer to the truth although in the right positions it was much more than
>that...
>
>
>
>
>>
>>He hung you out to dry by leaving you as primary defender of Deep Blue for
>>years, while he left the trivialities of computer chess to mere mortals like us.
>> The DB project doesn't deserve defense.  It hit computer chess like a
>>carpetbagger, then left in the night when the money was gone.
>>
>>bruce
>
>
>However, I would not attribute that to Hsu or Campbell.  They were active in
>computer chess for many years.  IBM pulled the plug for obvious reasons after
>they hit the peak of Mt. Everest...
>
>I'll always have a great deal of respect for the group.  PVS search was first
>used in my program by accident, as Murray and I played with it at an ACM event
>on a machine we were not using, but a machine we had to use due to a power loss
>during a key round.  Singular Extensions was Hsu's idea, and it certainly
>worked, since many are using it today in various forms.

I know nobody who use it in the way that Hsu used it.

Uri



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.