Some tweaks to the CCT rules

[bob]

For me, its a command line start up option that I didn't encode into the xboard/uci protocol subsystem. I could do that.

For the uci engines, polylgot could be modified to kib "book move", but not all the uci based programs use polyglot. If they use Aquarium, ChessAssistant or ChessPartner they don't have that level of control, so its not an option for them.

Then those interfaces are not allowed. That will put pressure on the authors to do things the right way.

[bob]

Crafty kibitzes after _every_ move. Everyone else can do this too. Or else play somewhere else. This is not that hard to fix, but some simply refuse to do so. My philosophy is to either (a) follow _all_ the rules; (b) don't play. No middle ground because none is necessary. yet each online event produces more exceptions.

Is there a compliant way of making xboard kibbitz book moves from a uci engine? I'm not aware of a way to make this work, currently.

Crafty started the "online kibitzing" stuff back in 1995. It has always done its own thing using the "tellics kibitz ..." approach. Any programmer can use that and not be lazy enough to depend on the various GUIs to do everything for them... Or else they can choose a GUI that works properly. Or they can contact the GUI author and ask for a fix so that the GUI can be used in online tournaments. Just saying "the GUI won't do this" is not good enough.

[Don]

Sorry to state this,but witnessing the Deep Junior-Komodo scandal,the rules of the CCT12 were a real mess....
Dr.D

Good question. How could this possibly have been ruled a win for black? Was this a time loss? In sudden death, I thought the worst such a result could be was a draw, since black has no possibility of checkmate. (Still, a shameful result for Junior.)

Ian

No, the result was a loss because Deep Junior disconnected for almost 10 minutes, not because of the endgame glitch. When Junior disconnected both programs thought the score was about even.

[Aaron Becker]

Is there a compliant way of making xboard kibbitz book moves from a uci engine? I'm not aware of a way to make this work, currently.

Crafty started the "online kibitzing" stuff back in 1995. It has always done its own thing using the "tellics kibitz ..." approach. Any programmer can use that and not be lazy enough to depend on the various GUIs to do everything for them... Or else they can choose a GUI that works properly. Or they can contact the GUI author and ask for a fix so that the GUI can be used in online tournaments. Just saying "the GUI won't do this" is not good enough.

There's no need to be so combative. I'm not trying to avoid kibbitzing book moves, I'm only trying to find the best way of doing so. If I just add "tellics" printouts to daydreamer, I think polyglot will eat them. If polyglot needs to be modified to support this feature, no one is well-served by everybody running off and hacking up their own incompatible solution to avoid your charges of laziness. We (and by "we" I mean the community of UCI engine authors that wish to participate in tournaments through polyglot) should take the time to design a proper solution that all UCI engines can benefit from.

[michiguel]

I agree with changing the disconnect time to 10 minutes. We have gotten much more complicated in recent years than the old days.

I disagree with the kibitzing issue penalty. Yes, they must kibitz and not whisper. It is too easy to accidentally start up with kibitzing off. For me, ChessPartner handles it and I just have to click on a button and set the proper ICC/FICS variables. However, the cluster version of Telepath doesn't work with ChessPartner, it works with Xboard. In Xboard, I have to start it up with an extra command line option to send to Telepath. Very easy to forget that.

Fixing the forgotten kibitz in ChessPartner may not require a disconnect but it does in Xboard.

Doesn't for me, I just use the zippy2 password and tell crafty to kibitz and it is done. I then add it to the crafty.rc file and it is fixed for the rest of the games...

I have a single complaint, and it can easily be addressed. I do not buy all of this bullshit about "I can't kibitz on a ponder hit" or other such nonsense. Fix the program(s). Crafty kibitzes after _every_ move.

The reminds me to tell you should look at the logs between Gaviota and Crafty this weekend. There was one move that crafty kibitzed "n/a". A bug may have been exposed in that particular move.

Miguel

Everyone else can do this too. Or else play somewhere else. This is not that hard to fix, but some simply refuse to do so. My philosophy is to either (a) follow _all_ the rules; (b) don't play. No middle ground because none is necessary. yet each online event produces more exceptions.

So, I agree with Miguel. When a person notices opponent not kibitzing, they inform the opponent and then the TD. The opponent must fix it immediately even if it means using one of the disconnects. If they have to use a second disconnect because they botched the job the first time then that is fine too.

The biggest problem we have with kibitzing is with the people that continually try to use Arena. It has never worked with kibitzing in any online tournament I've seen. The Arena guys claim it works, but I've never seen it work.

So, some early warning message may be in order to warn people that Arena is unlikely to work with kibitzing on FICS/ICC.

The second biggest problem is people complaining that it is not kibitzing when it is. The problem is when kib and allowkib variables are incorrectly set. This problem comes up multiple times per tournament. The only reason I call it the second biggest issue is because it is so easy to fix, however it appears more often than the first one.

The third sort of nonproblem with kibitzing is deep books. Some can not kibitz that it is a book move and their opponents think it is not kibitzing on move 27. This one is sort of easy to deal with; just check the clocks. There is the special case of falling out of and back into book.

Or why not just do the obvious and kibitz book moves? I do it. _anyone_ can do it. Or else just not play...

That issue came up 2 years ago at the ACCA Pan AM event in Thinker vs Crafty. People were complaining that Thinker wasn't kibitzing. Lance said it was still in book while Crafty had been out of book for almost 10 moves. Bob checked his log files and Thinker was indeed making immediate moves. When it finally came out of book, it started kibitzing.

[Richard Allbert]

I was wondering myself why people don't do that.

IIRC Winboard sends "ics Hostname" on startup when in ics mode....

Then the engine can simply use if(ics) [tellopponent],[tellall],[ tellothers] as it needs.

Regards

Richard

[M ANSARI]

It really is sad to see controversy after such a nice tourney. I guess this usually happens when rules are not clear or not enforced as they should. I don't think live kibitzing is a good idea as that allows the other program to see what the engine is thinking and play appropriately ... unfortunately we have reached a situation where there are some who would do that. Maybe whispering is better, but really that only adds one extra hurdle for someone unscrupulous to simply have another account filter out the whisper information. I guess something can be configured to have output only to a TD with a total log after the game. Also I do not think that an operator should have to decide if his opponent is following the rules or to react a certain way if his opponent has broken certain rules ... the TD should make an immediate decision and keep both players out of it. This would avoid uncomfortable situations where players would have to make decisions that can cause ill feeling among participants.

As usual the best thing is to have CLEAR rules and follow them to a T all the way through. Good fences make good neighbors and if the rules are clear and followed it would make the TD decisions much easier and thus less controversy would occur. I hate to see a good tourney marred like this, hopefully everyone will stop flinging accusations and figure a way how this can be fixed for the future.

[Bo Persson]

The only trouble is, having the same book author for different engines opens the tournament up to abuse, so why not remove any possibility of that?

Several engines are allowed to use the same compiler and brand of hardware. Why not the same brand of opening books?

[garybelton]

Several engines are allowed to use the same compiler and brand of hardware. Why not the same brand of opening books?

Can a compiler insert a line into your program that another program can exploit because it is compiled by the same compiler rather than a different compiler? Likewise with the hardware.

Perhaps the ICGA introduced the rule because of potential manipulation and that is also why the CCT are doing it?

[mathmoi]

The only trouble is, having the same book author for different engines opens the tournament up to abuse, so why not remove any possibility of that?

Several engines are allowed to use the same compiler and brand of hardware. Why not the same brand of opening books?

The computer and hardware are tools, like a baseball bat. The person that create the book is a team member, like a baseball team member.