Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 29th 07, 12:32 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2004
Posts: 834
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..




Ian Burton wrote:

M Winther wrote...

It's idiotic that it becomes a competition about best opening preparation.
Had they played Chess256 instead, then it would have been a proper
measure of playing strength. Chess256 is standard chess, only that
the opening setup for the pawns is chosen randomly while satisfying the
condition that the pawns must be either placed on the second or third
rank. There are 256 possible configurations. All of them are sound and
balanced, and fully playable. Black's setup mirrors white's. In all other
respects this game is the same as orthodox chess.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/randompawn.htm


Here we go again: Standard chess but ... Once there's a "but" (here an
"only") it's no longer standard chess, but some *******ization. Results
would mean nothing to the chess world.


It also doesn't solve the problem it is meant to solve. Making the
opening book 256 times bigger puts you right back where you started.

Far better from a standpoint of making it less of a contest between
opening book writers would be to limit both computers to a fixed
depth human-generated book -- somewhere in the 8 to 16 ply range,
and allowing the computer to pre-calculate and store a big opening
book past that initial starting point without human help. The
downside with that idea is that when playing against a human
grandmaster, the human has no way to turn of his memorized opening
lines, and yet also lacks the ability to memorize a large opening
book like the computers do. It would also be hard to police, and
makes humans look like sore losers that can't beat a computer
fair and square without forcing it to play worse than it otherwise
could.

--
Guy Macon
http://www.guymacon.com/

  #2   Report Post  
Old September 29th 07, 02:48 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 364
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..

Den 2007-09-29 13:32:26 skrev Guy Macon http://www.guymacon.com/:




Ian Burton wrote:

M Winther wrote...

It's idiotic that it becomes a competition about best opening preparation.
Had they played Chess256 instead, then it would have been a proper
measure of playing strength. Chess256 is standard chess, only that
the opening setup for the pawns is chosen randomly while satisfying the
condition that the pawns must be either placed on the second or third
rank. There are 256 possible configurations. All of them are sound and
balanced, and fully playable. Black's setup mirrors white's. In all other
respects this game is the same as orthodox chess.
http://hem.passagen.se/melki9/randompawn.htm


Here we go again: Standard chess but ... Once there's a "but" (here an
"only") it's no longer standard chess, but some *******ization. Results
would mean nothing to the chess world.


It also doesn't solve the problem it is meant to solve. Making the
opening book 256 times bigger puts you right back where you started.
[...]



No, it doesn't take us back from where we started because opening
books are prohibited in Chess256. To prohibit opening books in the
standard position doesn't work because the games would be quite boring
to the human onlookers, and in most cases strategically valueless.
With Chess256 it's a different thing.

Mats


  #3   Report Post  
Old September 29th 07, 08:03 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2004
Posts: 834
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..




M Winther wrote:

opening books are prohibited in Chess256.


Totally unwiorkable. You are expectin TDs to inspect the
code inside all computer entrants to make sure they don't
have a hidden opening book.

And still you have the basic unfairness caused by the fact
that human opponents would be allowed to study and memorize
opening lines while computers are not allowed to study and
memorize opening lines. That looks a lot like legally
cheating.

--
Guy Macon
http://www.guymacon.com/

  #4   Report Post  
Old September 30th 07, 06:33 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Nov 2006
Posts: 364
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..

Den 2007-09-29 21:03:49 skrev Guy Macon http://www.guymacon.com/:




M Winther wrote:

opening books are prohibited in Chess256.


Totally unwiorkable. You are expectin TDs to inspect the
code inside all computer entrants to make sure they don't
have a hidden opening book.

And still you have the basic unfairness caused by the fact
that human opponents would be allowed to study and memorize
opening lines while computers are not allowed to study and
memorize opening lines. That looks a lot like legally
cheating.


The prospect of analysing 255 positions in terms of opening
strategy and tactics is positively daunting. Moreover, computers
can't do it well. A human brain is needed. So it's a Sisyphos work.
Nobody would do this. The opponent could easily deviate from the
theory anyway. Employing an enormous opening book without
showing any sign of it, is very unlikely. There will be no cheating.

Mats
  #5   Report Post  
Old September 30th 07, 10:47 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2003
Posts: 41
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..

M Winther wrote:

The prospect of analysing 255 positions in terms of opening
strategy and tactics is positively daunting. Moreover, computers
can't do it well. A human brain is needed. So it's a Sisyphos work.
Nobody would do this. The opponent could easily deviate from the
theory anyway. Employing an enormous opening book without
showing any sign of it, is very unlikely. There will be no cheating.


This is naive.

A professional opening book such as used in these high level matches can
have over 500K opening moves in it. If you have to spread the effort
over 500k openings, that's still 2500 moves per opening. Enough to win
precious minutes on the clock and avoid strategical blunders early on.

The only thing that will matter is if my book is bigger than my
opponents. Not so much how big it is.

Even if "computers can't do it well", an automated analysis run
beforehand can still win you precious minutes on the clock, even if it
will avoid less strategical blunders.

And if you believe I can't hide the fact that I have a
book...well...just keep believing that

--
GCP


  #6   Report Post  
Old September 30th 07, 11:21 PM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,598
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..

M Winther wrote:
No, it doesn't take us back from where we started because opening
books are prohibited in Chess256.


What is an opening book? Is a piece of code that says, ``The first
move is to advance the pawn infront of the king by two squares'' an
opening book? Is a piece of code that says, ``Follow the instructions
in the file openings.book'' plus a file that says, ``advance the pawn
infront of the king by two squares'' an opening book?

How is this rule to be enforced?


Dave.

--
David Richerby Mentholated Homicidal Sushi (TM):
www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~davidr/ it's like a raw fish but it wants to
kill you and it's invigorating!
  #7   Report Post  
Old October 1st 07, 12:25 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2004
Posts: 834
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..




One could test the theory that all 256 possible Chess256 openings
are sound and balanced by tetting up a large series of computer
vs. computer matches starting with each. If some positions end
up with black winning 40-50% of the time and others end up with
black winning 0-10% of the time, it would tell us that the latter
positions are strongly unbalanced.

Until someone does that experiment, claims about how balanced
they are are just unfounded assertions.

And no, I am not going to do the experiment myself. I have
zero interest in Chess256. I like Good Old Chess.

--
Guy Macon
http://www.guymacon.com/


  #8   Report Post  
Old October 1st 07, 03:21 AM posted to rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 9,302
Default Zap beats Rybka in close match..

On Sep 30, 12:33 am, "M Winther" wrote:

The prospect of analysing 255 positions in terms of opening
strategy and tactics is positively daunting. Moreover, computers
can't do it well. A human brain is needed. So it's a Sisyphos work.
Nobody would do this.



This is nonsense; already with GetClub we have seen that
*somebody* will try anything, including asking the opponents
for the "right moves" to have the program thereafter play by
rote! Now THAT is a gargantuan task -- manually crafting an
openings book by hand, move by move, over a period of years
and from random submissions for improvement from those who
have an incentive to *not* be particularly helpful.

It's not too much trouble to punch in the 256 original positions
and let a top-rated program look it over for a long time, if one
has access to multiple computers; heck, I'll do it for just $99.99
with a half-off coupon.


-- help bot



Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Zap beats Rybka in close match.. SAT W-7 rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 43 October 2nd 07 01:41 AM
2nd Annual RGCP Grudge Match Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 29 April 26th 06 07:50 AM
Strongest program C.C.LONGTHORP rec.games.chess.computer (Computer Chess) 37 December 19th 05 07:21 PM
FIRST ANNUAL RGCP GRUDGE MATCH IS TODAY - SUNDAY, JUNE 26, 2005 (details inside) RGCP Grudge Match alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 1 June 26th 05 05:49 AM
Following the 1st Annual RGCP Grudge Match on ICC! (Sunday, June 26) Tyrone Slothrop alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 14 June 25th 05 07:50 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017