Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 22:46:20 09/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 1999 at 21:27:34, James T. Walker wrote: >On September 18, 1999 at 18:37:49, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On September 18, 1999 at 15:45:15, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On September 18, 1999 at 13:34:19, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>> >>>>On September 18, 1999 at 12:35:33, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>>I see that the first 10 moves of chess system tal were the same in spite of the >>>>>fact that it lost. >>>>>Do things like this happen to tal in games that are played manually. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>CStal saves learning files into a directory called book. >>>>these learning files should change the game. >>>>as you have seen, the learning gives priority even over book moves >>>>as we have seen in the example with the 3.f4 line. >>>>maybe the autoplayer stops cstal from saving the learn files. >>>>I don't know what this autoplayer does. I am not an expert in cheating. >>>>all i know is that the results the autoplayer produces are very different >>>>from the results i get in manually played games. so >>>>WHY should i use a device that influences the outcome negatively against >>>>my favourite program ? >>>>When i am playing manually, i can be sure that the machines are not connected >>>>anyway, no cable, no contact. this way i can be sure nobody manipulates. >>>>This is the reason i play the games manually. >>> >>>When you are playing games with auto232 _Y_0_U_ have no way to manipulate the >>>games including choosing a favorite opening. >> >>It's not so simple, consider a few points... >> >>#1. Instead of the move send weird stuff to the other PC as a result >>the other PC will crash. Do that in case your score is below -1.xx. >>Don't do it in every game. >*********** >I've very little incidents of programs crashing using the auto232. It happened >more often when I first got the Fritz/Junior/Nimzo programs. As far as I can >tell most all of that stuff has been fixed. I have noticed no pattern as to >when this happens with any particular program losing. I have often played 100 >blitz games in one day without a single crash using auto232. >************ As said I have the same opinion, it isn't practiced. >>#2. Let your own program crash when you are down in score. Don't do >>it every game. >> >******** >Same as above >******** > >>#3. Send the "move now" command to the other PC after say 10 seconds >>in a 60/60 or 40/120 game. Hide it a little, nobody will notice. >> >********* >Why would you allow the other computer to make your program move except on the >first move? Isn't it possible to prevent this in your program? Can you not >specify what commands your program will accept from the auto232 and when? >******* If you know the keyboard combination of for "force move" (for Rebel this is ALT_M) and this is send to the Rebel computer Rebel will make its move. >>I have not the impression it currently happens but is all possible >>if a programmer wants so. >> >>About books... >> >>You can easily recognize when the opponent is out of book simply by >>checking the opponent response time. With this information you can >>recognize the opponent. Think about this for a while. I have tried >>it for my own curiosity and it simply works. Now you can do nice >>things in case you know the opponent. Is it happening already? I >>don't know but it can be done and quite easily. >> >******** >I'm sure you are correct but you would need to know a lot about the other >programs book. Considering Rebel has over 30,000 variations in book I think. >******** A year ago I wrote some software that in 2-3 games could identify the computer opponent. Don't worry I will not use it. >>This whole auto232 thing is so fragile that I can imagine people >>don't want to touch it any longer. >> >>Ed Schroder >************ >Thanks for your comments Ed. You are one of my Hero's and I respect your >opinion. It just seems to me that there are plenty of people with enough >knowledge about programs/programming in general that if this were being done it >could be proven. If it happens (and I haven't the impression) it is impossible to proof. Ed Schroder >Especially if it is being done to the point where results like >Thorsten is getting can be turned into the results I am getting. So far, I have >played 8 games of CSTal-2 vs Crafty (2-6) and 5 games of Cstal-2 vs Hiarcs 7.32 >(0-5) all at 40/2. So my 2-11 score would require quite a lot of cheating if it >really should be like 10-3 favor CSTal-2. Yes I know the sample is still small >and very few people here are interested anyway. I'm finished with this >discussion now since it is a waste of time. >Regards, >Jim Walker >************* > > >> >> >>>When you play the games manually >>>Nobody but YOU can manipulate the games. That's the major difference. >>>Jim Walker
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.