Page 1 of 16

How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:28 am
by Peter Skinner
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: Select all

[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

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 4:41 am
by IanO
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?

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:09 am
by Peter Skinner
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

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:46 am
by Don
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.

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 6:16 am
by Peter Skinner
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/viewtopi ... 013#470013

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 7:18 am
by BubbaTough
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

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:25 am
by hgm
It could be a violation of laws against internet gambling. Basically a chess engine is just a cumbersome slot-machine client...

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:26 am
by gleperlier
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

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:02 am
by Jeroen
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!

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Posted: Tue Jun 19, 2012 9:03 am
by gleperlier
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 :)