Who should compete in Michael's Tournament?

[Michael Sherwin]

Why is a poll necessary. Anyone can organize a tournament and run it any way they want. Unlimited clones. No clones. Or anywhere in between. Why should "we" have any say-so in what he does? No, the event is not going to mean very much once the first suspected clone enters. But he is certainly free to do what he wants.

No not really! Not if I want my effort to be respected. That is why I could use your help. But, first I suspect that you would have to respect me. But, don't let that stop you as it is the integrity of the event that matters more than our personal relationship or lack of one.

[bob]

Why is a poll necessary. Anyone can organize a tournament and run it any way they want. Unlimited clones. No clones. Or anywhere in between. Why should "we" have any say-so in what he does? No, the event is not going to mean very much once the first suspected clone enters. But he is certainly free to do what he wants.

No not really! Not if I want my effort to be respected. That is why I could use your help. But, first I suspect that you would have to respect me. But, don't let that stop you as it is the integrity of the event that matters more than our personal relationship or lack of one.

No idea what you are talking about. No one will respect an event where "anything goes" with respect to non-original code... None of the ip* programs can compete in WCCC/ACCA events, as it should be, until they are shown to be something other than a reverse-engineered derivation of something. Nothing wrong with discussing them, or playing against them, but a serious tournament has to vet entrants if it is going to mean anything.

[Michael Sherwin]

Why is a poll necessary. Anyone can organize a tournament and run it any way they want. Unlimited clones. No clones. Or anywhere in between. Why should "we" have any say-so in what he does? No, the event is not going to mean very much once the first suspected clone enters. But he is certainly free to do what he wants.

No not really! Not if I want my effort to be respected. That is why I could use your help. But, first I suspect that you would have to respect me. But, don't let that stop you as it is the integrity of the event that matters more than our personal relationship or lack of one.

No idea what you are talking about. No one will respect an event where "anything goes" with respect to non-original code... None of the ip* programs can compete in WCCC/ACCA events, as it should be, until they are shown to be something other than a reverse-engineered derivation of something. Nothing wrong with discussing them, or playing against them, but a serious tournament has to vet entrants if it is going to mean anything.

That is why I asked the ACCA to take part. Charles even posted that he did not see a reason why the ACCA could not be a part of the event. Then dead silence after that. I sent a personal email, but there was no response. The door is still open if you and Charles want to walk through it!

[CRoberson]

Why is a poll necessary. Anyone can organize a tournament and run it any way they want. Unlimited clones. No clones. Or anywhere in between. Why should "we" have any say-so in what he does? No, the event is not going to mean very much once the first suspected clone enters. But he is certainly free to do what he wants.

No not really! Not if I want my effort to be respected. That is why I could use your help. But, first I suspect that you would have to respect me. But, don't let that stop you as it is the integrity of the event that matters more than our personal relationship or lack of one.

No idea what you are talking about. No one will respect an event where "anything goes" with respect to non-original code... None of the ip* programs can compete in WCCC/ACCA events, as it should be, until they are shown to be something other than a reverse-engineered derivation of something. Nothing wrong with discussing them, or playing against them, but a serious tournament has to vet entrants if it is going to mean anything.

That is why I asked the ACCA to take part. Charles even posted that he did not see a reason why the ACCA could not be a part of the event. Then dead silence after that. I sent a personal email, but there was no response. The door is still open if you and Charles want to walk through it!

This is my first day back to the forum after that post. I take a month off from computer chess after the ACCA Pan American event each year.

What initially has to be decided is what kind of competition is this. ACCA and WCCC events are mostly programming competitions. As such, clones are not allowed. Also, restricted hardware does limit the programming.

[silentshark]

No clones, please.

Suggest that all entries are either open-source, or for closed-source that an independent party can view the code if need be, to verify that it isn't a clone.

[Michael Sherwin]

Why is a poll necessary. Anyone can organize a tournament and run it any way they want. Unlimited clones. No clones. Or anywhere in between. Why should "we" have any say-so in what he does? No, the event is not going to mean very much once the first suspected clone enters. But he is certainly free to do what he wants.

No not really! Not if I want my effort to be respected. That is why I could use your help. But, first I suspect that you would have to respect me. But, don't let that stop you as it is the integrity of the event that matters more than our personal relationship or lack of one.

No idea what you are talking about. No one will respect an event where "anything goes" with respect to non-original code... None of the ip* programs can compete in WCCC/ACCA events, as it should be, until they are shown to be something other than a reverse-engineered derivation of something. Nothing wrong with discussing them, or playing against them, but a serious tournament has to vet entrants if it is going to mean anything.

That is why I asked the ACCA to take part. Charles even posted that he did not see a reason why the ACCA could not be a part of the event. Then dead silence after that. I sent a personal email, but there was no response. The door is still open if you and Charles want to walk through it!

This is my first day back to the forum after that post. I take a month off from computer chess after the ACCA Pan American event each year.

What initially has to be decided is what kind of competition is this. ACCA and WCCC events are mostly programming competitions. As such, clones are not allowed. Also, restricted hardware does limit the programming.

Sorry, I forget that some people have a life outside of computer chess!

I want an event for the authors that have started from scratch. I think that authors that have started from open source ,but, have done a complete rewrite for later versions can be considered in this group as we all must learn in our own way. I would say to the creators of stronger open source engines that you should be able to start over from scratch and have an engine ready by event time if indeed you wish to participate. There is enough time.

In your absence I have added an unlimited hardware section as well. The Tune Up for the World Championship!

[Michael Sherwin]

No clones, please.

Suggest that all entries are either open-source, or for closed-source that an independent party can view the code if need be, to verify that it isn't a clone.

I hear you! While it is not a good solution it may be the best that there is.

[overtond]

Why do you say when the first clone {whatever that means} enters, the tournament won't mean very much?

[Dave Mitchell]

Why do you say when the first clone {whatever that means} enters, the tournament won't mean very much?

They don't want the clone chess programs, to compete. (clones are programs that have borrowed idea's, principles, and/or code, too much to be considered original (by some at least)).

Why they don't want them to compete may be obvious from a list of the top engines:

no Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws
1 Rybka 3 x64 4CPU 3149 15 15 1188 72.7 % 2978 42.4 %
2** Naum 4 x64 4CPU 3088 15 15 907 55.9 % 3047 57.6 %
3 Deep Fritz 12 4CPU 3071 72 72 50 51.0 % 3064 46.0 %
4** Stockfish 1.6 x64 4CPU 3065 29 29 250 49.6 % 3067 53.6 %
5 Rybka 2.3.2a x64 4CPU 3055 17 17 841 65.2 % 2946 47.8 %
6 Deep Shredder 12 x64 4CPU 3033 32 32 250 49.2 % 3038 45.6 %
7 Deep Fritz 11 4CPU 3002 20 20 492 43.7 % 3046 56.1 %
8** Stockfish 1.4 x64 4CPU 3001 40 40 150 47.0 % 3022 48.7 %
9** Naum 3 x64 4CPU 2997 19 19 692 56.5 % 2951 46.5 %
10 Zappa Mexico x64 4CPU 2987 15 15 993 51.0 % 2981 50.6 %
11 Hiarcs 12.1 MP 4 CPU 2979 66 66 50 47.0 % 3000 54.0 %
12 Fruit 2.4 Beta A x64 4CPU 2935 19 19 730 47.9 % 2949 43.3 %
13 Deep Shredder 11 x64 4CPU 2932 19 19 752 46.7 % 2955 43.0 %
14** Naum 2.2 x64 4CPU 2905 20 20 550 50.6 % 2900 51.1 %
15 HIARCS 12 ShPV 4CPU 2902 19 19 721 42.3 % 2956 43.6 %
16 Deep Fritz 10.1 4CPU 2900 20 20 742 42.3 % 2954 39.5 %
17** Spark 0.3 x64 4CPU 2893 74 77 50 31.0 % 3032 42.0 %
18 HIARCS 11.2 MP 4CPU 2891 22 22 550 47.2 % 2910 45.3 %
19** Loop M1-P 4CPU 2846 21 21 600 40.5 % 2913 43.7 %
20 Glaurung 2.0.1 x64 4CPU 2835 21 21 600 38.8 % 2914 42.5 %
21 Deep Junior 10.1 4CPU 2830 22 22 600 38.0 % 2915 38.3 %
22** Bright-0.2c 4CPU 2802 23 23 600 34.1 % 2917 33.5 %

** programs are suspected of being clones (to the best of my knowledge).

These programs are supposed to have taken their code or idea's, from chess programs that are much weaker than they are.

It's pretty cagey to say "it's not original, it's a clone", and have to admit that the program in question is somehow, considerably stronger than the program it was alleged to have borrowed from.

It's a great mental exercise to practice, between programming stints, I'm sure.

[xsadar]

Why do you say when the first clone {whatever that means} enters, the tournament won't mean very much?

They don't want the clone chess programs, to compete. (clones are programs that have borrowed idea's, principles, and/or code, too much to be considered original (by some at least)).

Why they don't want them to compete may be obvious from a list of the top engines:

no Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws
1 Rybka 3 x64 4CPU 3149 15 15 1188 72.7 % 2978 42.4 %
2** Naum 4 x64 4CPU 3088 15 15 907 55.9 % 3047 57.6 %
3 Deep Fritz 12 4CPU 3071 72 72 50 51.0 % 3064 46.0 %
4** Stockfish 1.6 x64 4CPU 3065 29 29 250 49.6 % 3067 53.6 %
5 Rybka 2.3.2a x64 4CPU 3055 17 17 841 65.2 % 2946 47.8 %
6 Deep Shredder 12 x64 4CPU 3033 32 32 250 49.2 % 3038 45.6 %
7 Deep Fritz 11 4CPU 3002 20 20 492 43.7 % 3046 56.1 %
8** Stockfish 1.4 x64 4CPU 3001 40 40 150 47.0 % 3022 48.7 %
9** Naum 3 x64 4CPU 2997 19 19 692 56.5 % 2951 46.5 %
10 Zappa Mexico x64 4CPU 2987 15 15 993 51.0 % 2981 50.6 %
11 Hiarcs 12.1 MP 4 CPU 2979 66 66 50 47.0 % 3000 54.0 %
12 Fruit 2.4 Beta A x64 4CPU 2935 19 19 730 47.9 % 2949 43.3 %
13 Deep Shredder 11 x64 4CPU 2932 19 19 752 46.7 % 2955 43.0 %
14** Naum 2.2 x64 4CPU 2905 20 20 550 50.6 % 2900 51.1 %
15 HIARCS 12 ShPV 4CPU 2902 19 19 721 42.3 % 2956 43.6 %
16 Deep Fritz 10.1 4CPU 2900 20 20 742 42.3 % 2954 39.5 %
17** Spark 0.3 x64 4CPU 2893 74 77 50 31.0 % 3032 42.0 %
18 HIARCS 11.2 MP 4CPU 2891 22 22 550 47.2 % 2910 45.3 %
19** Loop M1-P 4CPU 2846 21 21 600 40.5 % 2913 43.7 %
20 Glaurung 2.0.1 x64 4CPU 2835 21 21 600 38.8 % 2914 42.5 %
21 Deep Junior 10.1 4CPU 2830 22 22 600 38.0 % 2915 38.3 %
22** Bright-0.2c 4CPU 2802 23 23 600 34.1 % 2917 33.5 %

** programs are suspected of being clones (to the best of my knowledge).

These programs are supposed to have taken their code or idea's, from chess programs that are much weaker than they are.

It's pretty cagey to say "it's not original, it's a clone", and have to admit that the program in question is somehow, considerably stronger than the program it was alleged to have borrowed from.

It's a great mental exercise to practice, between programming stints, I'm sure.

I don't know the details of the other engines, but I don't think anybody would have a problem with Stockfish participating as long as Glaurung doesn't. And I don't think anybody would have a problem with me entering my engine Vapor, as long as I don't enter my old engine Zilch which it was based on. In these cases the original author get's his due.

Where the problem would lie, is if, for example, I decided I want a chance to win this tournament (which I woudn't have with my own engine), so I take an already strong engine like Stockfish, and decide to make my own clone of it (making just a few minor modifications) and take full credit for it. Of course if Tord and the rest supported me entering my clone and chose not to enter Stockfish. That wouldn't be a problem.