Thomas Mayer wrote: Hi Ed,
I don't think that we need a new organisation. ICGA is fine, most of the members are programmers or have been programmers of game playing entitities. So why found a new organisation when we have already one. That doesn't help at all.
If we quit with rule #2 this is the end of competition. Following the CSVN would mean that you must allow every entrant, so anyone could play with whatever he wants. So just take e.g. the source of Ivanhoe, rename it, compile it and here you are with something that has good chances to win a tournament. I don't see any version of rule #2 with additions that allows engines like Rybka & Houdini (in case of Rybka with huge changes compared to the origin, in case of Houdini at least with some very clever changes) but disallows above mentioned engines. Or do you want tourneys about who can make the best Ippo/Fruit/Whatever-Clone ?
Greets, Thomas
Hi Thomas,
I am not saying to replace the ICGA, I am saying we need a new body that offers an ALL-IN solution to get rid of the clones once and for all. That the chess programmers take their fate into their own hands and decide what is a clone and what is an original program.
And that such a body can serve as a source of information for the ICGA, CSVN, other organizers, rating lists to make decisions.
Please read the current discussion I am currently having with Bob for a better understanding.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... #pid374916
I recently had a long conversation with David, I addressed the clone problem 2 times and he wasn't interested. Meaning, not my problem, I only care for my own tournament.
I can understand it but I think we need something better to deal the cloners. The WCC is great fun, but last just one week. But a year has 52 of them.