Cyclone 2.3 released

[kranium]

http://www.cyclonechess.com/

This is probably the final release of Cyclone.

It's clear that developing a derivative of an open-source program (like fruit or toga) has it's limitations and disadvantages.
1) many people in the chess-community see these programs in a negative light, and they are often regarded as 'clones'.
2) the programs are not allowed to enter any serious (official) tournaments.
3) true recognition for a chess program seems to come only when that program is 100% original.
4) some authors have suggested that strong open-source progams hurt authors of 'weaker' programs.

For these reasons, I have decided to concentrate my efforts 100% on my own engine, which I intend to publish as
open-source next year, or when/if i can get it (hopefully) to a resonable level, IMHO from 2100 to ~ 2500.

In the meantime, i'll likely be a somewhat less active poster here (will be be good-riddence for many i suspect!). :>

See-you later-
Norm

[fern]

Thank you Norman.
Fdo

[Norm Pollock]

"1) many people in the chess-community see these programs in a negative light, and they are often regarded as 'clones'. "

... unless the derivative program makes a substantial gain in Elo (at least 50 points), in which case all is "forgiven".

[Golem]

http://www.cyclonechess.com/
This is probably the final release of Cyclone.

Hi Norman,

I want to say "thank you" for the work you have done with Cyclone. I really like your engine and I hope you will reconsider your decision in the near future and not stop on improving your engine. You have made great improvments in Cyclone and I'm sure you can do more in the future.

About the development of fruit derivatives, I find it really sad that all the developpers involved does not work together. There is some good idea in the fruit derivative (in Cyclone, Grapefruit, Toga, etc) but there is nothing done to aggregate all of those idea.

It's clear that developing a derivative of an open-source program (like fruit or toga) has it's limitations and disadvantages.
1) many people in the chess-community see these programs in a negative light, and they are often regarded as 'clones'.
2) the programs are not allowed to enter any serious (official) tournaments.
3) true recognition for a chess program seems to come only when that program is 100% original.
4) some authors have suggested that strong open-source progams hurt authors of 'weaker' programs.

With all the discussion about fruit clones, a lot of people don't know how to deal with derivative engines. I think that part of the problem with the fruit derivative is that the original author is not active anymore. For me, the best recognition you can obtain is by the original author himself, by sharing the improvment you have found with him...

For these reasons, I have decided to concentrate my efforts 100% on my own engine, which I intend to publish as open-source next year, or when/if i can get it (hopefully) to a resonable level, IMHO from 2100 to ~ 2500.

I wish you good luck with your own engine. (but hope you'll keep developping Cyclone in parallel

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

I for one deeply respect your work over Cyclone and I hope you reconsider your decision
Note that you'll benifit a lot while writing your own chess engine and still improving the Cyclone....
BTW,Cyclone and Cyclops are included in my rating list,more specificly on the waiting list yet

[matejst]

I hope you will continue to improve Cyclone. It is an excellent engine, and, just like dr WD, I appreciate your work.

I use Cyclone for analysis, with Stockfish or Glaurung, and I hope there will be further versions. It is not only about improving strength.

Best wishes!

BS

[Kirk]

http://www.cyclonechess.com/

This is probably the final release of Cyclone.

It's clear that developing a derivative of an open-source program (like fruit or toga) has it's limitations and disadvantages.
1) many people in the chess-community see these programs in a negative light, and they are often regarded as 'clones'.
2) the programs are not allowed to enter any serious (official) tournaments.
3) true recognition for a chess program seems to come only when that program is 100% original.
4) some authors have suggested that strong open-source progams hurt authors of 'weaker' programs.

For these reasons, I have decided to concentrate my efforts 100% on my own engine, which I intend to publish as
open-source next year, or when/if i can get it (hopefully) to a resonable level, IMHO from 2100 to ~ 2500.

In the meantime, i'll likely be a somewhat less active poster here (will be be good-riddence for many i suspect!). :>

See-you later-
Norm

The nattering neighbobs of negativism may seem "loud", but they majority are open to the idea, as long as the person gives honest credit to the original.

There is some wisdom in not reinventing the wheel and improving on it or giving it a different look as less time is wasted at the beginning.

Think of every download of your program as a positive "vote" to continue

[Audmeister]

I usually dont post much, just troll on these forums, but this post was well put.

Words of wisdom right there.

[matejst]

After some testing...

It seems that Cyclone 2.3 is weaker than Cyclone 2.2.

I also tested the new Glaurung, and it seems that it is about the same strength as Stockfish 1.1, with a similar style. Stockfish showed that it is very strong in complicated endgames (it saved a lot of endgames against Cyclone), just like Glaurung. The amount of used hashtables is shown in a completely different way.

Cyclone is better in open positions, and although the ply depth is often the same, I have the impression that it is faster.

I would like to see an open source engine with a learning function. I am quite satisfied with the strength of the existing free engines, and, in my opinion, an effort could be made to increase the ease of use: tablebases, learning function, meaningful param...

Hope all the authors of free engines will continue their excellent and not always appreciated work.

BS

[Steffelino]

Thanks Norm!
Good luck with your own engine!
If you need some testhelp you know my adress!
I hope for an 64 bit engine!
Best to you!