Hiarcs wins 3rd World Chess Software Championship

[lkaufman]

My view is somewhere in between the two extremes seen in the responses here. The ICGA deserves preference in calling its event the WC due to its history and FIDE ties. However if the conditions are such that they fail to attract any of the top eligible engines I think another group that does have such entrants gets the right to consider their event the real championship. This was exactly the situation with the human WC during most of the 1990s. FIDE kept organizing the "World Championship", while Kasparov kept playing matches outside of FIDE with only obscure organizations sponsoring. The result: the vast majority of the chess world considered Kasparov the true champion, not Karpov, Khalifman, Ponomariov, etc.; I even forget all the names of the FIDE champions.
In my view the TCEC is as much the real computer championship as was the winner of the various Kasparov matches played outside FIDE. They both included the best players based on some reasonable system, they both lacked the backing of a recognized authority, and they both were more likely (by far) than the "official" event to create a true champion. If some group comes along that organizes an event as inclusive, long, and public as TCEC then it can also claim to be the WC. I don't think there is any rival event on the horizon now though. Maybe Martin doesn't call it a WC due to the possibiiity of a lawsuit, but that has no bearing on its validity as such.
I do support the ICGA, but they need to run an event of comparable length, quality, quantity, and inclusiveness to reclaim their event as the true championship. This does not mean they must accept engines they consider to be clones, but it does mean that qualified entrants should be able to participate at little or no cost.
Maybe a reasonable solution is for ICGA to retain the "World Computer Championship" as it implies comparing actual computers; the most expensive should win. The winner of the most prestigious software event (now TCEC) should be called World Chess Engine Champion or perhaps World Chess PC Champion.

[hgm]

I think you miss the most important point: whether it is a championship for programs or programmers. This, IMO, is a much more fundamental distinction than software vs hardware.

[lkaufman]

I think you miss the most important point: whether it is a championship for programs or programmers. This, IMO, is a much more fundamental distinction than software vs hardware.

That is a very good point. The ICGA is presumably in your judgment a championship for programmers rather than for programs. But then shouldn't the title go to the programmers rather than to the program?

[hgm]

Indeed, the WCCC is set up as a tournament for programmers, and I think the title should indeed go to the programmer. One practical problem, however, is that programs are often team efforts, so the title would have to go to a long list of names, even most Chess programmers would never have heard of. It is a bit like the nobel prize. There you also tend to remember what the Nobel prize was give for (laser cooling, Bose-Einstein condensation), and not so much who exactly shared the prize.

[Uri Blass]

Yes, exactly. Without win in match against Houdini, Hiarcs will never be world champion. If you want to become heavy weight champion in boxing, you have to beat Vladimir Kličko not some drunk guys in the pub

..
Hiarcs _won_ an event against the opposition presented. It's impossible for Hiarcs to win against someone who _didn't_ participate. Therefore, Hiarcs _is_ the World Computer Software Champion because is won against the other programs at the World Computer Software Championships.
..
Based on your logic, it doesn't matter who wins the World Series if the Yankees didn't make it to the playoffs. Since they didn't face the Yankees, calling them the World Champions is ridiculous.

Peter

Well here is an equal conditions 50 games match between WCCC champion and Houdini 4: http://cegt.forumieren.com/t41-testing-houdini-40-x64

Quite a devastating result for a champion

Hiarcs did not become a champion for 1 cpu and with no opening books.

Houdini4 is better but if you want a fair comparison then every program should use WCCC hardware that was for more than 1 cpu and it also should use own book.

I expect houdini to win also in these conditions but not by that big margin because I believe that more than 1 core+own books reduce the rating difference.

[hgm]

All it does is show that it takes a lot more than merely a strong engine to become World Champion!