Author: Roland Boehm
Date: 13:07:44 03/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 15, 1999 at 17:29:00, Mark Young wrote: >Hiarcs 7 has been banned from playing the other programs on the chess server >Chess4You. I joined this chess server under the name DoomsDayMachine. After only >11 games and a 11-0 score and a 2900+ rating. I was told by an admin that Hiarcs >7 is too *strong* to play on the Chess4You server, and that Hiarcs 7's games >would be resigned to bring Hiarcs 7's ratings back into line to what it should >be, and Hiarcs 7 could no longer play the other programs.:) > >I don't try to understand this logic of the admins at Chess4You, but I can think >of no higher praise for Hiarcs 7. It is an outstanding program in terms of Chess >Strength. > >Mark Young Hi, I am errol, the head admin of Chess4You. I would like to give my opinion on the allegations of Mark Young: First of all it is not true that HIARCS 7 or Mr. Young or any other program or person has ever been banned from playing on Chess4You! It is not true that Mr. Young after 11 games had a 11 - 0 score and a 2900+ rating. It is also not true that HIARCS 7 is too strong to play on Chess4You. On the contrary, we want to have strong and interesting chess programs playing on Chess4You - the more the better. I estimate the blitz rating of "HIARCS 7" should be really higher than 2900. But I think Mr. Young's way it is not the right way to praise its strength. The blitz rating of DOOMsDayMachine operated by Mr. Mark Young is now 2690! But now to the facts: DoomsDayMachine played one standard game against Bulldozer and got a standard rating of 2365. Then he won 7 games against Bulldozer and got a blitz rating of 2861. Thereafter he played 7 games against Red Baron and his rating fell to 2812! Then he lost against Bulldozer and fell to 2745. That might have been very disappointing to him. During several hours (!) one of our admins was admonishing him that his account did not indicate a (C) to show he used a computer program. This was not Mr. Young's fault but mine. I had forgotten to set the (C). If the (C) is set while a player is logged in, it is not visible before a logout and a new login. Therefore Mr.Young was asked to log out and to log in again. Mr Young instead continued playing. When he played against a human player his next game was forfeited. Mr. Young asked me then if he was banned. I told him this was n o t the case. But instead of answering me, Mr. Young prefered to log out and wrote his "Story of the DoomsDayMachine". The evidence can be seen by anyone who logs in to Chess4You and has a look at the "history" of DoomsDayMachine. There all its games, ratings and results are stored. Furthermore I must confess that I do not understand the "logic" of the rating too: I can easily set the rating of a player or chess program, of HIARCS or Bulldozer as well. But I will only do so if the strength of that player is proven. This is the case with well known computer programs or grandmasters. Other players should gain their rating by playing. If Kasparov or HIARCS would play rated against our beginner's program DisasterArea and won about 10 games they would get a rating of 1800. I think it is fairer for all players if Kasparov or HIARCS 7 e.g. get an initial rating of about 2900 or 3000+ (hereby solving the "rating problem" of Bulldozer, if he should have one). But what, if an operator of a computer program is fond of testing strange openings or loosing stategies"? I am not a rating specialist and would be very interested to learn your opinion about this item. I send my excuses to Mr. Young for not having set him on the computer list and I hope in the future we can solve such problems in a more adequate and friendly way. We invite him and all players with strong or not so strong but interesting computer programs to try to beat our programs and to play on Chess4You! Best regards errol
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.