Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:09:54 06/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 1999 at 16:38:15, James T. Walker wrote: >On June 28, 1999 at 11:00:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 28, 1999 at 09:57:20, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>> >>>On June 28, 1999 at 01:27:53, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On June 27, 1999 at 16:43:59, Mark Young wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 27, 1999 at 15:49:53, odell hall wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> I am thinking about setting up a computer account on ICC? Does anyone know >>>>>>Which Program would do the best? If the choice was between Genius 5 , hiarcs6, >>>>>>Mchess 8 or Genius 3? I have heard that Genius 5 is the Best a blitz chess >>>>>>(game/15) is this still true. What program would tear the crafty clone Data to >>>>>>shreds!! (incredibly strong data is!) Or should I just go out and purchase >>>>>>Chessmaster 6000 to do the Job? >>>>> >>>>>The best results I have had is with Hiarcs 7.01. I have not had a chance to play >>>>>7.32 online because of the testing I am running now. I most likely will only >>>>>test Hiarcs 7.32 against humans online, after testing Hiarcs 7.01 online against >>>>>other computers its left a bad taste in my mouth. I try to test against the best >>>>>programs online and play a set amount of games, but with Hiarcs 7 this became >>>>>almost impossible because of the high winning percentage Hiarcs 7 was >>>>>generating. The automatic programs would no play me, or change the time formula >>>>>to only play 0 inc games in the middle of my testing, and some of the other >>>>>manuale computer operators were no better. Rating protection in online play is >>>>>only getting worse, and thats to bad because it was a nice tool to use in the >>>>>evaluation of chess programs. >>>> >>>>I do not understand it. >>>>I think that programmers should prefer to play against strong opponents because >>>>they can learn from the games that they lose to improve their programs. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>He is not talking about programmers. >>> >>>bruce >> >> >>Bruce, myself, Stanback, Ban, plus the usual cast of the "under 2600 club" here >>play on ICC and do just what you suggest. But we are a tiny bit of the total >>number of computers playing there. There are dozens of Fritz, Hiarcs, shredder, >>and so forth (not to mention crafty, comet, tcb, etc) that are run by _others_. >>And _they_ are not working on improving their programs. Many work only to >>improve their 'rating' which is a point I don't understand. > >He may be talking about programmers. If the shoe fits, wear it. Programmers >are not immune from the action he is talking about. There seems to be a rating >point contest on ICC and programmers seem to be caught up in this action too. >It seems like programmers can't separate their egos from their programs either. >There are many childish "games" being played on ICC with computer accounts. I >run a computer account on ICC as a hobby. I enjoy watching the different >programs play each other. It is a long time hobby of mine that goes back to my >first two chess computers (Chess Challenger 10 vs Sargon 2.5). I can play Fritz >vs Crafty at home but I don't have a "Quad Xeon" so I don't get the same quality >of play I would get if I get a chance to play Fritz/Hiarcs vs Crafty. So I enjoy >the games on the Internet. And If I get a chance to watch a GM / IM play >Fritz/Hiarcs it's a real treat for me! That's what I get out of running a >computer account. And Bob, I got to tell you, your words ring a little hollow >on this point. I'm still on the Crafty "Noplay" list and my only "Crime" is >that I played 5 games vs Crafty. This after I explained, that there was nothing >in your notes about this and it was just a misunderstanding. Is this your way >of protecting your rating points? Silly question. If I wanted to protect my rating, first program I would +noplay would be ferret, yet we play regularly when Bruce is there. I would also dump the other fast programs (machinehead, shredder 3 on a 500+ megahertz machine. I _never_ +noplay for rating. I do have a custom interface that catches the fact that I am playing a computer, and when it does, after 4 games it will automatically +noplay you, although it will -noplay you 4 hours later. In your case, it is possible that either ICC went down, or I logged crafty out before the automatic -noplay. However, my notes have _always_ had the 4 game limit. I apparently deleted it recently... which was my fault. But this has been in crafty's notes for at _least_ 2 years, so it isn't 'news'... >I, like the above poster, was under the impression that programmers would like >to test their programs against top level competition to look for flaws. I would >think you would learn more from one loss vs Fritz than winning 16 of 17 vs a FM. > I thought it would be better if the progams were actually playing chess rather >than just sitting idle waiting for a GM / IM to come along. Apparently I was >wrong. >Jim Walker I am _much_ more interested in playing humans. And when I log on and get a complaint from a GM about "I was playing a match and a computer jumped in before I could match again" that computer becomes +noplayed and it _stays_ there. Because I can play computer games whenever I want here off-line, but on ICC I get the chance to play 50 games vs GM players _every_ day. And I'd much rather sit idle for an hour waiting for them to come along. I don't pay much attention to games vs computers because I (a) don't know much about the hardware; (b) don't know what influence the operator exerts. If rating was all I was interested in, however, I could absolutely get to 3300+ and _stay_ there. No computers. No increments. And it is easy... That isn't my goal, however... solving 'anti-computer' _is_ and I am not going to do that playing computers 24 hours a day...
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.