| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Peter Skinner
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2012 10:28 pm Post subject: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
  |
|
It seems that people are upset with the way the World Computer Championship handles the tournament, being that not everyone is allowed to participate.
There are those that believe everyone should be able to enter an engine and compete for the title, regardless of authenticity, known authorship, and possible derivative status.
So I am proposing the "Internet World Computer Chess Championship". 
Same rules basically from the CCT events, except _anyone_ can enter _any_ program.
| Code: |
[b]Rules would be as follows:[/b]
Site: The Internet Chess Club (ICC)
Tournament Director: Peter Skinner
Date: TBD
Registration Deadline: TBD
Time controls: 50 + 3
Rounds: 7 Round Swiss.
Round Times: 09:00 11:00 13:00 15:00* (*Saturday Only)
(Above times are EST – Eastern Standard Time)
Please be sure to check for time zone differences!
All games to be played in one weekend:
4 games on Saturday
3 games on Sunday
Blitz Tournament to follow regular event
In the event of a tie situation: There will be a series of 10+3 blitz games until one player has a 1.5 advantage.
Registration:
Fees: Main Event
There will be a fee of $100 to enter.
$50 goes towards the prize fund.
$25 of this fee goes to the Internet Chess Club to pay for a 3 month membership to the venue.
$25 goes to the TD for services rendered and registration services.
If an entrant already has an ICC account, $25.00 will be subtracted from the entry fee.
Prize fund will be divided as follows:
1st place: 40%
2nd place: 30%
3rd place: 20%
Top Amateur: 10%
Fees: Blitz event
There will be a fee of $50 to enter.
100% goes towards the prize fund.
Prize fund will be divided as follows:
1st place: 40%
2nd place: 30%
3rd place: 20%
Top Amateur: 10%
Rules:
No [b]manually operated programs[/b], and all programs must kibitz their evaluation, and book moves/TB hits if possible. Providing as much information as possible for the viewers and participants is key. It should also be noted that 1-3 lines of text is sufficient. Whispering is not the same as kibitzing, as the opponent can not see your evaluation. If your program is found to be whispering instead of kibitzing, you will be asked to correct the issue. For this reason, you may need to disconnect and return. One disconnection towards rule 5 will be counted, whether you need to disconnect or not.
Participants can use any hardware they can attain. Participants choosing to use remotely located hardware are recommended to have a suitable back up solution in the event of an uncorrectable malfunction.
In the event that there is a late withdrawal or uneven amounts of players, the TD can substitute a program in place of the departing entrant to keep the numbered entries the same. And to avoid a bye round.
In the event that the wrong colors are played, the programs will have 5 minutes to make the correction, or the program that issued the match request will forfeit the game.
Disconnection/Forfeit Rules
In the event of a disconnection, the party will be given 10 minutes to return to complete the game; and no more than 2 disconnections per game will be allowed. On the third time, the game will be a forfeit. This is absolute.
The Tournament Director will keep track of disconnections, and responsibility is his alone to enforce this rule. The opponent will not have the ability to choose to continue or to claim the win. The Tournament Director’s decision will be final.
In the event that a program can not continue a game due to interface or program issues, it will forfeit the game. Under no circumstances will a new game be formed or the game restarted.
If a program is not open for matches or arrives late for a scheduled round, after 20 minutes the game will be considered a forfeit.
[b]Seeding Criteria[/b]
Seeding will be based on the ICC Standard rating, as there is no way of manually seeding.
|
Much cheaper than the ICGA events, and open for _everyone_.
Any interest?
Peter
_________________
I got kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bible's to the fiction section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Ian Osgood
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 255
Location: Portland, OR
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:41 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
I'd watch it! Sounds like a fine counterpoint to the restrictiveness of other events. Let the melee begin!
I presume authors would be given precedence if there were multiple entries using the same engine? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Skinner
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:09 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| IanO wrote: |
I'd watch it! Sounds like a fine counterpoint to the restrictiveness of other events. Let the melee begin!
I presume authors would be given precedence if there were multiple entries using the same engine? |
Yes, that is a good point.
I would give preference to authors operating their own programs. Once they have entered, no one else could enter the same program as the originating author has entered.
This is a rule from all other tournaments, so I don't see why it shouldn't continue here.
Peter
_________________
I got kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bible's to the fiction section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Don Dailey
Joined: 29 Apr 2008
Posts: 4322
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 3:46 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| Peter Skinner wrote: |
| IanO wrote: |
I'd watch it! Sounds like a fine counterpoint to the restrictiveness of other events. Let the melee begin!
I presume authors would be given precedence if there were multiple entries using the same engine? |
Yes, that is a good point.
I would give preference to authors operating their own programs. Once they have entered, no one else could enter the same program as the originating author has entered.
This is a rule from all other tournaments, so I don't see why it shouldn't continue here.
Peter |
If there are no questions asked ask and this is open to anything and everything then I want to enter several versions of Komodo too. I can make up different names if that will help.
_________________
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons." -Kang and Kodos |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Peter Skinner
Joined: 26 Feb 2006
Posts: 1600
Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:16 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| Don wrote: |
If there are no questions asked ask and this is open to anything and everything then I want to enter several versions of Komodo too. I can make up different names if that will help. |
Feel free
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=470013#470013
_________________
I got kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bible's to the fiction section. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam Hamilton
Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 1095
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:18 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| Don wrote: |
| Peter Skinner wrote: |
| IanO wrote: |
I'd watch it! Sounds like a fine counterpoint to the restrictiveness of other events. Let the melee begin!
I presume authors would be given precedence if there were multiple entries using the same engine? |
Yes, that is a good point.
I would give preference to authors operating their own programs. Once they have entered, no one else could enter the same program as the originating author has entered.
This is a rule from all other tournaments, so I don't see why it shouldn't continue here.
Peter |
If there are no questions asked ask and this is open to anything and everything then I want to enter several versions of Komodo too. I can make up different names if that will help. |
Just out of curiosity, how many hundreds of dollars of entry fee are you willing to invest in this?
-Sam |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
H.G.Muller
Joined: 10 Mar 2006
Posts: 12767
Location: Amsterdam
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:25 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| It could be a violation of laws against internet gambling. Basically a chess engine is just a cumbersome slot-machine client... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gabriel LEPERLIER
Joined: 04 Feb 2012
Posts: 936
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:26 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
Sounds really great but the only main issue is : How will you handle the "Houdini" and "Critter" renamed engine ?
Many people will like to play different engines for fun, tunning book etc. even for 100$, but some of them will chase for the price money.
Cheers,
Gab |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeroen Noomen
Joined: 08 Mar 2006
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:02 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| Best idea in computer chess since ages! You clearly have my vote, as this will be the most interesting computer chess tournament in history. Bravo Peter! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gabriel LEPERLIER
Joined: 04 Feb 2012
Posts: 936
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:03 am Post subject: Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument? |
|
|
| Jeroen wrote: |
| Best idea in computer chess since ages! You clearly have my vote, as this will be the most interesting computer chess tournament in history. Bravo Peter! |
Yeah, this will be |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
