Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:12:42 06/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 28, 1999 at 20:11:15, Mark Young wrote: >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? >>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 > >To be fair, it must stated that Bruce and Bob in the past have gone out of their >way to allow me to test the commercail programs against their programs. Bruce >has a open policy when playing his computer, no limit on games, a fair inc level >for me to use etc., and if you beat it he wants you to play more. Bruce was >totally cool about people playing his program. > >But the number of computer players, programmers or not that don't protect their >rating is getting to small, and you have to look to hard to find enough sample >size to make testing meaningful. I should add that I have played _many_ long matches vs computers. All I ask is to be contacted first. I have set it up so Vincent could play 24 hours non- stop testing for Paderborn. "hossa" can play as well, as I have my interface set to not +noplay them after 4 games. All it takes is an 'ask'... and the stipulation that no GM players have set up to play me a bunch of games in advance, which happens from time to time..
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.