How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Don » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:17 pm

BubbaTough wrote:
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
My plan is to utilize other people for this. I would let as many people who are willing to help - so I won't have to invest anything. This is what people want so that we can find out once and for all which program is strongest - so I might as well take a shot too. I have many experimental versions of Komodo and one of them could be stronger than anything else - they are deserve to be put in the tournament so that we won't wonder which one is best. In fact I can provide an unlimited number of versions.

Don
Capital punishment would be more effective as a preventive measure if it were administered prior to the crime.

User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:27 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Don » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:26 pm

gleperlier wrote: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
Hi Gab,

This tournament is designed for that, to let people do what they want to do because they feel that is much more meaningful. Please note what Peter said:

Same rules basically from the CCT events, except _anyone_ can enter _any_ program.

So there is no problem using Houdini. You can see from many of the comments here that people like this idea, probably because they feel it will be much more meaningful. And how will we know if Houdini is really strongest without letting people run it on their own hardware? Since everyone will set Houdini up differently on different hardware we would never know which is best if they are not allowed into the tournament out of some misguided attempt at fairness.

It would probably be silly to run anything other than Houdini - might as well run the best program you can come up with - in that way nobody would be needlessly handicapped.
Capital punishment would be more effective as a preventive measure if it were administered prior to the crime.

chrisw
Posts: 2186
Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2012 2:28 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by chrisw » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:26 pm

Peter Skinner wrote: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
I would like to offer support for this tournament by offering an initial $100 for a brilliancy prize. Format being five games selected by a panel of thinkers, and those five games then being ranked by a user poll on this forum to determine the winner.

I propose asking those who stand out from the crowd and show original and creative thought in the face of adversity to form this panel. Well, what better criteria for brilliancy prize selection?

Ed Schroeder
Jeroen Noomen
Rolf Tueschen
George Speight
Fernando Villegas
and Yours Truly.

Offers to increase the prize fund welcome.

IanO
Posts: 478
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:45 pm
Location: Portland, OR
Contact:

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by IanO » Tue Jun 19, 2012 12:58 pm

I was going to donate $100 to the general prize fund, but this is an even better idea! And having the main event be self-funding is a good way to keep the tournament a manageable size.

Another idea would be an upset prize, to give extra incentive to the mid-tier participants.

(Any chance you could bring CS Tal out of retirement? It would be great to see some classics among the crowd!)

User avatar
Laskos
Posts: 9497
Joined: Wed Jul 26, 2006 8:21 pm
Full name: Kai Laskos

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Laskos » Tue Jun 19, 2012 1:20 pm

Don wrote:
gleperlier wrote: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
Hi Gab,

This tournament is designed for that, to let people do what they want to do because they feel that is much more meaningful. Please note what Peter said:

Same rules basically from the CCT events, except _anyone_ can enter _any_ program.

So there is no problem using Houdini. You can see from many of the comments here that people like this idea, probably because they feel it will be much more meaningful. And how will we know if Houdini is really strongest without letting people run it on their own hardware? Since everyone will set Houdini up differently on different hardware we would never know which is best if they are not allowed into the tournament out of some misguided attempt at fairness.

It would probably be silly to run anything other than Houdini - might as well run the best program you can come up with - in that way nobody would be needlessly handicapped.
These derisive posts of yours and Skinner, which in fact state that only opaque, crony rules of WCCC and CCT work, show clearly that WCCC and CCT mob crap must end as it was till now. I already wrote that applying the 60% CSVN rule will result in only one Houdini, one Komodo, etc. participating. Your absurd ramblings show that you do not want to meet Houdini & other strong engines in any tourney.

Always the same argument, stating that you do not want 100 instances of engine X to participate, you in fact want 0 instances of your competitors compete in WCCC or CCT crap. You simply want to win WCCC or CCT by cheating, a thing you accuse others so often.

Kai

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Jeroen » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:03 pm

It appears that the real reason for this tournament is slightly different:

[MODERATION] quote deleted. It comes from an post with an original PM not authorized to be quoted in part.

But you are making a huge mistake in thinking that this is a waste of time and 'utterly useless'. People want to see:

A) the strongest programs
B) the best hardware
C) the best books

Remember Freestyle? That was a HUGE success. And in Freestyle 90%-100% of the players used Rybka. Basically you are organising a Freestyle tournament with more variety and the 'engine only' option!

User avatar
michiguel
Posts: 6389
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Contact:

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by michiguel » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:13 pm

Jeroen wrote:It appears that the real reason for this tournament is slightly different:

[MODERATION] quote deleted. It comes from an post with an original PM not authorized to be quoted in part

But you are making a huge mistake in thinking that this is a waste of time and 'utterly useless'. People want to see:

A) the strongest programs
B) the best hardware
C) the best books

Remember Freestyle? That was a HUGE success. And in Freestyle 90%-100% of the players used Rybka. Basically you are organising a Freestyle tournament with more variety and the 'engine only' option!
You are quoting someone who misquote Peter. He did not say that. Someone else did it sarcastically. Please, people, make sure the quotes are correct, otherwise this turns into a mess. I will encourage the person who started the misquote to fix the problem.

Miguel
Last edited by michiguel on Tue Jun 19, 2012 5:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Alexander Schmidt
Posts: 1086
Joined: Thu May 10, 2007 12:49 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Alexander Schmidt » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:17 pm

Sounds like a exciting tournament. 10 - 100 airheads can participate in a tournament with their own hack of Ippolit and feel like a real programmer. :lol:

I hope you mean that somehow ironic. If not you will soon find out that you need some kind of restriction of the participants. Beside that you need some kind of association to start a somehow authentic wccc. Everyone could call his own little tournament a wccc. You will have soon hundrets of world champions. One step closer to the self-liquidation of computerchess...

Darkmoon
Posts: 191
Joined: Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:48 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Darkmoon » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:19 pm

Peter Skinner wrote:
Ferdy wrote:
gleperlier wrote: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
I guess this is not the issue, the issue is to know the winning engine from this tournamanent :) .
Perhaps the emphasis is not to the programmer but to the engine. Important thing here is to verify the person applying for the tourney. Tell his real name, address and phone number :D.
If the original author doesn't enter the event, _anyone_ will be able to register it. The beautiful thing about this event, it will give the people who bash the WCCC/ACCA/CCT events for only having verified authors participate a chance to see their favorite engine in a tournament environment.

If 20 enter with Houdini, so be it.

Being that the entry fees are only accepted via PayPal (and prize money distributed), I would assume more would have their real name there. Not that I am interested at all.

This is REALLY a "bring the best engine, hardware, and book that you can attain." We'll just how much fun it is.

If someone wants to put 5 horses in the race, so be it.

Peter
But, why go from one extreme to another? I don't understand the rationale. Why wouldn't you expect only the author/developers to operate their respective programs or their representatives-and given that no duplication of participation allowed. Just a question.

Jeroen
Posts: 501
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:49 pm

Re: How about we settle the WCCC argument?

Post by Jeroen » Tue Jun 19, 2012 2:34 pm

You are quoting someone who misquote Peter. He did not say that. Someone else did it sarcastically. Please, people, make sure the quotes are correct, otherwise this turns into a mess. I will encourage the person who started the misquote to fix the problem.

Several people showed me this quote and attributed it to Peter. My apologies to Peter if this is not what he said.

Doesn't take away my enthousiasm about this tournament, however! Best hardware, best programs, best books => this is what we want to see :D

Post Reply