World Computer Chess Championship ?

[rodolfoleoni]

Why not? About the real balance of power between the engines, it would surely be more credible of the world championship.

Of course, mine was a provocation (I hope I have not offended anyone) but, I'm sure that these rules are interpreted overly restrictive. The interpretation of Article 2 is to say the least subjective and unilateral.

I am equally sure that a series of tournaments, organized in the manner I have indicated, would collect more credibility and reputation of the tournament pompously called "World Championship" (which actually is not).
Today, nobody watches the ranking ICGA. To what end? What credibility has it? Most of the comments that I heard, they were just sarcastic.

You must admit, there's a lot of difference between a programmer who spent a dozen years making its engine growing from scratch to its current strenght, and a programmer who had some brilliant ideas about already existing open sources. A different way to compete. I'd say, a completely different sport. That's why they cannot participate the same competition. Then, everybody can look at ranking lists showing many derivatives atop. They play the best chess, but XY% of work was by someone else...

[Carotino]

@ Rodolfo:
Right, I can not say anything about this. On the other hand, you admit that nowadays it is almost impossible to find a software "chemically pure". Every so often, it turns out that even the most stalwart virgins, have had some minor plastic surgery!
So what do you do? Will agree with me that the current world championship is "slightly" comic... Or the ICGA will decide to renew it and to set aside certain "finesse", or it will implode, with an irreversible process that is already in place.

[rodolfoleoni]

Roberto, I respect your viewpoint, but I disagree. I think many (most) engines are fully original work of their authors. I'm a team member of one of those engines. I was very sorry when Don and Larry decided to stay out of WCCC because MP wasn't yet implemented. Komodo would have been fighting for first place even if SP, I guess. And I think it's fully original. I think there wouldn't have been so many polemics if Komodo was the Champion. But to see any of the hundred Ivanhoes winning at WCCC.....

[geots]

In Chess, we have the world chess champion Anand and the strongest player Carlsen. This also applies to Computer Chess, Junior and Houdini.

Between Ananad and Carlsen there aren't 300 ELO point of difference ! Following your analogy, is like if the world chess champion of 2012 would be a club player !

Between houdini and Junior there are also not 300 ELO point of difference
if we assume books and long time control.

Here is one list without books but with ponder on

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_20_P ... liste.html

Houdini's rating is 3016 and Junior13's rating is 2797

I strongly believe that the difference is smaller when program use their own book,more processors than one processor and slightly slower time control than 40/20 like people use in WCCC

I guess that the difference is only something like 150 elo in WCCC conditions and being 150 elo weaker than Carlsen is still a level of almost 2700 that is not a level of a club player.

For longer time control
I can find only 166 elo difference at 120/40

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn//40120n ... liste.html

I can also find
at 20/40 the following

http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/40_40%2 ... liste.html

3 Houdini 1.5a x64 4CPU 3088
17 Houdini 1.5a x64 1CPU 3014
80 Deep Junior 13 x64 4CPU 2883
197 Deep Junior 13 x64 1CPU 2762

You can see smaller difference with 4 cpu relative to 1 cpu.

Uri I am sorry if the truth hurts some people, but I see no use trying to sugar-coat it. The authors of these engines already know. Junior, for instance- with Houdini 1.5a, Strelka, a number of the Ivanhoes, a free Stockfish and Critter- I would not give you 10 bucks for Deep Junior. What would I do with it if I had it- throw beer cans at it?

This is about the least amount of sense I have ever heard you make.


gts

[Sedat Canbaz]

Why not? About the real balance of power between the engines, it would surely be more credible of the world championship.

Of course, mine was a provocation (I hope I have not offended anyone) but, I'm sure that these rules are interpreted overly restrictive. The interpretation of Article 2 is to say the least subjective and unilateral.

I am equally sure that a series of tournaments, organized in the manner I have indicated, would collect more credibility and reputation of the tournament pompously called "World Championship" (which actually is not).
Today, nobody watches the ranking ICGA. To what end? What credibility has it? Most of the comments that I heard, they were just sarcastic.

You must admit, there's a lot of difference between a programmer who spent a dozen years making its engine growing from scratch to its current strenght, and a programmer who had some brilliant ideas about already existing open sources. A different way to compete. I'd say, a completely different sport. That's why they cannot participate the same competition. Then, everybody can look at ranking lists showing many derivatives atop. They play the best chess, but XY% of work was by someone else...

Dear Rodolfo,

I like your comments...and i see you are well-informed about ComputerChess

That's why can i ask you a question
Do you have any information about the below engines

I wonder, those engines are started growing from scratch ?
Zappa
Komodo
Fruit

Btw,i will be very glad too,if you inform me:
-which engine is released firstly - Zappa or Fruit ?

Thanks in forwards,
Sedat

[rodolfoleoni]

Why not? About the real balance of power between the engines, it would surely be more credible of the world championship.

Of course, mine was a provocation (I hope I have not offended anyone) but, I'm sure that these rules are interpreted overly restrictive. The interpretation of Article 2 is to say the least subjective and unilateral.

I am equally sure that a series of tournaments, organized in the manner I have indicated, would collect more credibility and reputation of the tournament pompously called "World Championship" (which actually is not).
Today, nobody watches the ranking ICGA. To what end? What credibility has it? Most of the comments that I heard, they were just sarcastic.

You must admit, there's a lot of difference between a programmer who spent a dozen years making its engine growing from scratch to its current strenght, and a programmer who had some brilliant ideas about already existing open sources. A different way to compete. I'd say, a completely different sport. That's why they cannot participate the same competition. Then, everybody can look at ranking lists showing many derivatives atop. They play the best chess, but XY% of work was by someone else...

Dear Rodolfo,

I like your comments...and i see you are well-informed about ComputerChess

That's why can i ask you a question
Do you have any information about the below engines

I wonder, those engines are started growing from scratch ?
Zappa
Komodo
Fruit

Btw,i will be very glad too,if you inform me:
-which engine is released firstly - Zappa or Fruit ?

Thanks in forwards,
Sedat

Hi Sedat,

is it a test? Shall I be included into some rating list?

I started with computer chess some years ago. 6 or 7 years, I don't remember.. Those times, I was a tester for Romichess, then for the old Baron 2.X series. Fabien has been some kind of a comet, I guess Cozzie released his first Zappa before than Fruit was released. And I've no reason to doubt both Cozzie and Letouzey worked on their engines from scratch. If you have different evidences, you can submit the cases to ICGA...

About Komodo: it's a more recent work, but not the first experience of Don. I just don't remember the name of his first engine. No doubt Komodo got great improvement after the R3/Ippo "incident". That happened in favor of every top engine programmer, anyway. To look into Ippos and to understand how they work gave many ideas. To take ideas is allowed, to copy/paste code isn't. So, yes, I think it's a work from scratch. Besides, Komodo has a playing style which differs very much from other top ones.

Did I get the medal?

[Sedat Canbaz]

I think it is absurd to talk of ICGA. It'is simply dead.
This association has done a lot for chess engines... In the '70s and '80s! The trouble is that their leaders have stood firm in those years. They're waving a bogey (called "clone") trying to pretend to be the last barrier against barbarism, but in doing so, they are self-condemned to extinction... Like the dinosaurs. I tell them: "Thanks, you've done so much, you will be forever in our hearts, but now please ... Goodbye and thanks!

The solution is simple, and I turn to the proposal to 'all the authors of goodwill':

It takes a lot to make a new association? I think not. You just get together (virtually. We are no longer in the 80s, now there's internet!), decide the rules (simple and clear) and a few other details then... Simply play! Tournaments, leagues, match ... Everything is possible.
I think it would be important to create certain categories and different types of competition, later you can look a sponsors... I do not think this is very difficult.

Dear Roberto,

Yes...we need really a new organization,otherwise (with the current organization) we will not see the Top Engines of 3300-3400 Elo

Actually its will be great,if the new 'World Championships' to be played in two systems:Swiss and also as Leagues

League system is very interesting and exiting too

For example,two ore more leagues-based Top 16 or Top 20 participants

Super League:
----------------
1 Houdini
2 Critter
3 Ivanhoe
4 Stockfish
5 Rybka
6 Vitruvius
7 Fire
8 Naum
9 Komodo
10 Equinox
11 Spike
12 Fritz
13 Chiron
14 Shredder
15 Protector
16 Loop

Second League:
--------------
1 Junior
2 Hiarcs
3 Sjeng
4 Pandix
5 Spark
6 Zappa
7 Fruit
8 Thinker
9 Tornado
10 Onno
11 MilkoChess
12 Crafty
13 Jonny
14 The Baron
15 Hannibal
16 Gull


Best Regards,
Sedat

I believe it'd be a nice idea, but...... I strongly believe, if Houdini, Ivanhoe, Rybka, Vitruvius, Fire are in the event, many programmers would decide to stay out...

Hmm...you can be right

But however, our SCCT/Testo Book Leagues are based on many brave Book Authors and they have no any fear of loosing...

Best,
Sedat

[Sedat Canbaz]

Why not? About the real balance of power between the engines, it would surely be more credible of the world championship.

Of course, mine was a provocation (I hope I have not offended anyone) but, I'm sure that these rules are interpreted overly restrictive. The interpretation of Article 2 is to say the least subjective and unilateral.

I am equally sure that a series of tournaments, organized in the manner I have indicated, would collect more credibility and reputation of the tournament pompously called "World Championship" (which actually is not).
Today, nobody watches the ranking ICGA. To what end? What credibility has it? Most of the comments that I heard, they were just sarcastic.

You must admit, there's a lot of difference between a programmer who spent a dozen years making its engine growing from scratch to its current strenght, and a programmer who had some brilliant ideas about already existing open sources. A different way to compete. I'd say, a completely different sport. That's why they cannot participate the same competition. Then, everybody can look at ranking lists showing many derivatives atop. They play the best chess, but XY% of work was by someone else...

Dear Rodolfo,

I like your comments...and i see you are well-informed about ComputerChess

That's why can i ask you a question
Do you have any information about the below engines

I wonder, those engines are started growing from scratch ?
Zappa
Komodo
Fruit

Btw,i will be very glad too,if you inform me:
-which engine is released firstly - Zappa or Fruit ?

Thanks in forwards,
Sedat

Hi Sedat,

is it a test? Shall I be included into some rating list?

I started with computer chess some years ago. 6 or 7 years, I don't remember.. Those times, I was a tester for Romichess, then for the old Baron 2.X series. Fabien has been some kind of a comet, I guess Cozzie released his first Zappa before than Fruit was released. And I've no reason to doubt both Cozzie and Letouzey worked on their engines from scratch. If you have different evidences, you can submit the cases to ICGA...

About Komodo: it's a more recent work, but not the first experience of Don. I just don't remember the name of his first engine. No doubt Komodo got great improvement after the R3/Ippo "incident". That happened in favor of every top engine programmer, anyway. To look into Ippos and to understand how they work gave many ideas. To take ideas is allowed, to copy/paste code isn't. So, yes, I think it's a work from scratch. Besides, Komodo has a playing style which differs very much from other top ones.

Did I get the medal?

Thanks for your useful information dear Rodolfo

Yes...you get a golden medal !!

I asked this question,due to i found some similarities:
http://www.sedatcanbaz.com/chess/scct-no-books/

No..thanks,but there are better chess friends than me,who are already experienced in submission the cases to ICGA...

Greetings,
Sedat

[rodolfoleoni]

Why not? About the real balance of power between the engines, it would surely be more credible of the world championship.

Of course, mine was a provocation (I hope I have not offended anyone) but, I'm sure that these rules are interpreted overly restrictive. The interpretation of Article 2 is to say the least subjective and unilateral.

I am equally sure that a series of tournaments, organized in the manner I have indicated, would collect more credibility and reputation of the tournament pompously called "World Championship" (which actually is not).
Today, nobody watches the ranking ICGA. To what end? What credibility has it? Most of the comments that I heard, they were just sarcastic.

You must admit, there's a lot of difference between a programmer who spent a dozen years making its engine growing from scratch to its current strenght, and a programmer who had some brilliant ideas about already existing open sources. A different way to compete. I'd say, a completely different sport. That's why they cannot participate the same competition. Then, everybody can look at ranking lists showing many derivatives atop. They play the best chess, but XY% of work was by someone else...

Dear Rodolfo,

I like your comments...and i see you are well-informed about ComputerChess

That's why can i ask you a question
Do you have any information about the below engines

I wonder, those engines are started growing from scratch ?
Zappa
Komodo
Fruit

Btw,i will be very glad too,if you inform me:
-which engine is released firstly - Zappa or Fruit ?

Thanks in forwards,
Sedat

Hi Sedat,

is it a test? Shall I be included into some rating list?

I started with computer chess some years ago. 6 or 7 years, I don't remember.. Those times, I was a tester for Romichess, then for the old Baron 2.X series. Fabien has been some kind of a comet, I guess Cozzie released his first Zappa before than Fruit was released. And I've no reason to doubt both Cozzie and Letouzey worked on their engines from scratch. If you have different evidences, you can submit the cases to ICGA...

About Komodo: it's a more recent work, but not the first experience of Don. I just don't remember the name of his first engine. No doubt Komodo got great improvement after the R3/Ippo "incident". That happened in favor of every top engine programmer, anyway. To look into Ippos and to understand how they work gave many ideas. To take ideas is allowed, to copy/paste code isn't. So, yes, I think it's a work from scratch. Besides, Komodo has a playing style which differs very much from other top ones.

Did I get the medal?

Thanks for your useful information dear Rodolfo

Yes...you get a golden medal !!

I asked this question,due to i found some similarities:
http://www.sedatcanbaz.com/chess/scct-no-books/

No..thanks,but there are better chess friends than me,who are already experienced in submission the cases to ICGA...

Greetings,
Sedat

Your similarity tests are interesting, I'm just too sleepy to look at them with accuracy.

I consider a similarity should be run on a set of positions, and the first plies of PVs should be considered. Just because engines can give the same move, but with very different search and eval....

Too late! Goodnight!

[Sedat Canbaz]

One thing more dear Rodolfo,

See my view about the the current issue:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 6&start=80


Good night,
Sedat