Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Crafty rating on ICC

Author: Ricardo Gibert

Date: 12:43:02 10/28/99

Go up one level in this thread


On October 28, 1999 at 14:50:42, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On October 28, 1999 at 14:26:57, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>
>>On October 27, 1999 at 15:22:29, Alexander Kure wrote:
>>
>>>On October 27, 1999 at 11:55:49, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>You noplayed the two highest rated blitz computers around (Ban & Varguz). The
>>>>others are either hundreds of points lower or don't come any longer.
>>>>
>>>
>>>As I run Varguz on my second compi I think I can add something:
>>>
>>>I do not care if Crafty is noplaying Varguz. I do not have a noplaylist, cause I
>>>simply do not care. I think Crafty is an amateur program that could learn a lot
>>>from playing the commercials.
>>>Let me put it this way: Compared to the strong commercial programs like Junior,
>>>Fritz, Hiarcs and Nimzo Crafty is much weaker and needs some improvements to be
>>>a match for the above programs on equal hardware.
>>
>>Be fair. You are forgetting that the commercial programs do not publish their
>>source code. Sure they are stronger, they have the crafty source code to look
>>at. Due to this, one might say that crafty defines the dividing line between the
>>top programs and the also rans. If your program is not at least as good as
>>crafty, then it is not a top program. No matter how much Hyatt improves his
>>program, he will never be able to best the top programs (for very long anyway),
>>since he gives away all his ideas.
>>
>>>
>>>Greetings Alex
>
>
>And we _know_ that nobody uses those outdated ideas in Crafty, right?  :)
>
>IE book learning, some of the evaluation terms...  etc.  I have been really
>hesitant to release the new pawn majority code because no one else is doing
>this that I can recognize, at least not doing it effectively.  The minute 17.0
>hits the street, others will be doing it soon.
>
>Good or bad?

Not just good, great! Crafty has doubtless elevated the playing strength of all
chess programs (both commercial and non-) by making the source public. Alex got
it backwards: The important point is not so much that crafty _could_ learn a lot
from the commercial programs, but rather the commercial programs _do_ learn a
lot from crafty.

>
>A one-way flow of information?

Yes. If they want to compete with crafty on an equal footing, they should
publish their source.

>
>Is it really worth it?



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.