Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 02:39:36 12/31/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 31, 2005 at 03:52:29, Ernst Walet wrote: >On December 30, 2005 at 20:29:44, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On December 30, 2005 at 19:16:07, Ernest Bonnem wrote: >> >>>Who can give an answer? >>>Vas? >>>Ernst? >>>anybody else knows? >> >>I think that it is trivial. >> >>It is dangerous to play with an untested version. >> >> >>Rybka beta was tested heavily by the CEGT team and other people. >>Rybka Preview is a new version and still was not tested enough. >> > >This was exacly the reason why Vasik choose to pplay with the beta version. > > >>A more interesting question is why the opponents resigned against rybka and did >>not continue until mate because it is known that rybka has a bug that may cause >>it problems to win won positions because it does not care about distance to >>mate. >> > >Let me say that the reason why others didn't want to try Rybka's mating >capabilities has everything to do with the friendly atmosphere in wich the >tournament took place. Ok, this is absolutely fine! But then it's wrong to read something too deep into the results. But we had this before. Shredder could only win Graz because it got a full point (instead of the half point from the draw) from Jonny. Just to make this very clear. IMO the whole involvement of operators / programmers, who then want to be nice and noble, is out-dated and a fair internet event has a clear sportive advantage. You can't have both! - A gentleman-like ambience with faulty arbiter decisions but overall love and friendship between operators (who are doing a job that a decent machine should be able to do on its own!) who then want to have fun on Thursday evening and in always the same hotels or... - A real and sportive competition with the absolute domination of the programs plus machines on their own and results that have some meaning and significance. Just to avoid a typical misunderstanding, I want to add that to prove the class of Rybka nobody had needed such an exhibition. And I am really astonished how the description of the details of proceduring in Paderborn decreased the meaning of the results we discussed so heatedly here on CCC and I am possibly the only one to comment on the apparent split. How could we dare to discuss so deeply certain moves of particular games if for example in Paderborn an agreement prevented any attempts to go into "dirty" mode - which is part of every modern sport?! I had the impression that we here made a proxy competition in debating things out of a so-called real life competition held in cotton-wool gloves... ;) > > >>The bug was no problem in CEGT because the interface adjudicates the result >>based on evaluations but it could be a problem in real games. >> >>Uri > >Ernst.
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.