You are from Russia !!!!!

[mcostalba]

This morning two things got my attention while reading talkchess posts.

On one hand Graham with his always interesting amateur division 1 tournament:

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48709

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12

On another hand I see the usual witch-hunt against Murka 3.0 that has the only sin of being a newcomer.

I looked at Murka's sources and what was clear to me, apart from the ideas used, apart from the way search is implemented, apart from all, the thing that I could feel is the passion, yes, the passion, the attention to details, the long hours spent, the love that the author put in its baby.

It is a real pity to see all this effort cover my mud by people that are not aware of this, nor can be aware because they don't have the skills to read a source. This is not a limit, of course, but can become a deadly poison when is mixed with the willingness to judge other people work.

Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Code: Select all

Hey, you are Russia !  
No, I'm not, I'm from Italy, I can show you my passport to prove that. 
No, I don't care, moreover I'm not able to read your passport, I just look at your face: you must be from Russia !!!!

P.S: I really enjoy Graham's tournament and, even I am no expert of tournaments, I really can see his great passion for what he does, and this is nice to see. Of course he is free to test whatever he wants and as long as he wants, I picked this example not as a bad example or to go against Graham, just to highlight how all this clone discussion is inconsistent and incoherent and, as of July 2013, really obsolete from my point of view.

[geots]

This morning two things got my attention while reading talkchess posts.

On one hand Graham with his always interesting amateur division 1 tournament:

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48709

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12

On another hand I see the usual witch-hunt against Murka 3.0 that has the only sin of being a newcomer.

I looked at Murka's sources and what was clear to me, apart from the ideas used, apart from the way search is implemented, apart from all, the thing that I could feel is the passion, yes, the passion, the attention to details, the long hours spent, the love that the author put in its baby.

It is a real pity to see all this effort cover my mud by people that are not aware of this, nor can be aware because they don't have the skills to read a source. This is not a limit, of course, but can become a deadly poison when is mixed with the willingness to judge other people work.

Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Code: Select all

Hey, you are Russia !  
No, I'm not, I'm from Italy, I can show you my passport to prove that. 
No, I don't care, moreover I'm not able to read your passport, I just look at your face: you must be from Russia !!!!

P.S: I really enjoy Graham's tournament and, even I am no expert of tournaments, I really can see his great passion for what he does, and this is nice to see. Of course he is free to test whatever he wants and as long as he wants, I picked this example not as a bad example or to go against Graham, just to highlight how all this clone discussion is inconsistent and incoherent and, as of July 2013, really obsolete from my point of view.

And another very fresh breath of air- and so well said. Thank you also, Marco. (And keep up the great work!)


All the best to you-

gts

[Graham Banks]

This morning two things got my attention while reading talkchess posts.

On one hand Graham with his always interesting amateur division 1 tournament:

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48709

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12

On another hand I see the usual witch-hunt against Murka 3.0 that has the only sin of being a newcomer.

I looked at Murka's sources and what was clear to me, apart from the ideas used, apart from the way search is implemented, apart from all, the thing that I could feel is the passion, yes, the passion, the attention to details, the long hours spent, the love that the author put in its baby.

It is a real pity to see all this effort cover my mud by people that are not aware of this, nor can be aware because they don't have the skills to read a source. This is not a limit, of course, but can become a deadly poison when is mixed with the willingness to judge other people work.

Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Code: Select all

Hey, you are Russia !  
No, I'm not, I'm from Italy, I can show you my passport to prove that. 
No, I don't care, moreover I'm not able to read your passport, I just look at your face: you must be from Russia !!!!

P.S: I really enjoy Graham's tournament and, even I am no expert of tournaments, I really can see his great passion for what he does, and this is nice to see. Of course he is free to test whatever he wants and as long as he wants, I picked this example not as a bad example or to go against Graham, just to highlight how all this clone discussion is inconsistent and incoherent and, as of July 2013, really obsolete from my point of view.

Hi Marco,

Murka 3.0 will be playing in my Amateur Division 3 tournament starting on Tuesday.
It missed out on Division 2 because it lost a short playoff match to DiscoCheck 4.3.

I've also started a Murka 3.0 gauntlet.

Your comments should give thought to many.

It was just in the last few days I had a post deleted from the Hiarcs forum giving the link to the 8 core tournament that I'm currently running.
Funny how tournaments or rating lists with Rybka in are fine (and rightly so in my opinion), yet not tournaments or lists with these derivative engines included.
A private message I sent to Mark a week ago regarding the matter remains unopened.

Hypocracy seems rife in computer chess at present.

All the best with Stockfish.
Graham.

[lucasart]

This morning two things got my attention while reading talkchess posts.

On one hand Graham with his always interesting amateur division 1 tournament:

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48709

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12

On another hand I see the usual witch-hunt against Murka 3.0 that has the only sin of being a newcomer.

I looked at Murka's sources and what was clear to me, apart from the ideas used, apart from the way search is implemented, apart from all, the thing that I could feel is the passion, yes, the passion, the attention to details, the long hours spent, the love that the author put in its baby.

It is a real pity to see all this effort cover my mud by people that are not aware of this, nor can be aware because they don't have the skills to read a source. This is not a limit, of course, but can become a deadly poison when is mixed with the willingness to judge other people work.

Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Code: Select all

Hey, you are Russia !  
No, I'm not, I'm from Italy, I can show you my passport to prove that. 
No, I don't care, moreover I'm not able to read your passport, I just look at your face: you must be from Russia !!!!

P.S: I really enjoy Graham's tournament and, even I am no expert of tournaments, I really can see his great passion for what he does, and this is nice to see. Of course he is free to test whatever he wants and as long as he wants, I picked this example not as a bad example or to go against Graham, just to highlight how all this clone discussion is inconsistent and incoherent and, as of July 2013, really obsolete from my point of view.

Thank you Marco. I'm glad to not be the only one who is annoyed by the systematic witch hunt against new engines.

I wish Igor good luck with Murka, and although it's probably not 2900 elo yet (as was advertised somewhere in the Murka thread), I'm sure it will be very soon. Progress since version 2.0 is huge.

Go Igor, go! And don't listen to these ignorants, they're jealous and don't have a fraction of your skills at making a chess engine (so instead they became chess engine "critique").

[kranium]

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12
Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Marco-
might it also be goodsense (on your part) to to examine all sources before pronouncing an engine as 'orginal'...
as in this case, it's well-established that one of the 'original' engines you mention in risk of being kicked off started life from very controversial sources.

[Adam Hair]

This morning two things got my attention while reading talkchess posts.

On one hand Graham with his always interesting amateur division 1 tournament:

http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=48709

is going to kick off from first division 2 of the only 4 "original" engines remaining, all the others are SF and Ippo and its derivations for a total of 8 (!) engines out of 12

On another hand I see the usual witch-hunt against Murka 3.0 that has the only sin of being a newcomer.

I looked at Murka's sources and what was clear to me, apart from the ideas used, apart from the way search is implemented, apart from all, the thing that I could feel is the passion, yes, the passion, the attention to details, the long hours spent, the love that the author put in its baby.

It is a real pity to see all this effort cover my mud by people that are not aware of this, nor can be aware because they don't have the skills to read a source. This is not a limit, of course, but can become a deadly poison when is mixed with the willingness to judge other people work.

Now this can be a biased comment, but when an author chooses to open the sources, as Murka's did, he should really be granted at least the goodsense of look at them before to judge.

Code: Select all

Hey, you are Russia !  
No, I'm not, I'm from Italy, I can show you my passport to prove that. 
No, I don't care, moreover I'm not able to read your passport, I just look at your face: you must be from Russia !!!!

P.S: I really enjoy Graham's tournament and, even I am no expert of tournaments, I really can see his great passion for what he does, and this is nice to see. Of course he is free to test whatever he wants and as long as he wants, I picked this example not as a bad example or to go against Graham, just to highlight how all this clone discussion is inconsistent and incoherent and, as of July 2013, really obsolete from my point of view.

I agree with your sentiment, Marco. I just do not see the witch hunt. I do not see the effort by anybody in this forum to cover Murka's author's work with mud.

[pedrox]

On the next page there is a Similary test for Murka 3.0.

Murka fails. ts over 55 per cent.

http://computer-chess.org/forum/index.p ... ad&id=2507

I offer this for information only. I have not looked at the source code of the engine, nor do I know how it works 100% of the test.

Marco:

Murka is a original work?
Is is a derivate of Strelka?
What is your opinion on Similarity test?

[pedrox]

I'm sorry, I did not know that the information was already in another thread, I just saw.

[mcostalba]

What is your opinion on Similarity test?

I don't want to blame anybody. And I don't want to refer to someone in particular, my rant was not against a person, but against an attitude that has been inherited from a not so distant past, where, I admit, people where trying to understand what was going on with all these 3000 ELO engines popping out from the blue.

But now we know from where the 3000 ELO engines have popped out and we also know that more or less most of the authors, of course in different ways, maybe also indirectly, have benefited from these same open sources.

This has helped the average engine to quickly raise the ELO ladder and now to start to look ahead to further increase their strenght, maybe even with some novelty and some original idea.

So that kind of attitude has now made its time and to me it seems obsolete and belonging to a period in engine development that is more and more behind our shoulders.....the Ippo era is quickly reaching its sunset, we have to move on now.

[lech]

Marco,
my comment for Graham's tournaments is:
TO BE DOESN'T MEAN IS THERE.
greetings for you
Marek