I don't get it...

[kranium]

Ippolit facts:
The development of IvanHoe, etc. has been ongoing for 2 years now...
the program has grown from a basic skeleton engine to a full-featured analysis tool...
they have added feature after feature... including many technical innovations.

the development includes (but not limited to):

Windows and Linux support
unique SMP code,
a complete bitbase solution that surpasses Nalimov EGTB,
Montecarlo analysis,
sophisticated hashing options,
compiling tracing,
Magic Bitboards,
ZugZwang detection
Large pages
Eval and Material explanation modes,
etc., etc.
the list goes on and on...

The authors have denied ever RE'ing Rybka
There's not a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing
R. Vida and many others have expressed serious doubt that Ippolit is a clone of anything

Strelka facts:
The 1st versions (1.0 and 2.0) were RE'd Rybka with Fruit 2.1, the author states it as fact
The newest version (5) based on RE'ing Houdini, Rybka, etc., the author states it as fact:
"This is primarily fish 3, Hippolyta, Houdini, and Kritter".

Strelka is accepted as a valid engine and tested by the CCRL:
http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/cg ... B%2064-bit
The establishment's golden-boy compiler (JA) is now collaborating with Jury on the compiles, apparently even adding 64-bit support

--------------
Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?


The hypocrisy and arbitrary standards confound the imagination!
The situation is ludicrous...and the responsibility/failure lies with the entrenched CCC 'Good-old boys' establishment.

[Alex Lobanov]

Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?

Because the initiator was Vas R.

Потому что инициатором был Васик Р.

[Alexander Schmidt]

Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?

Just like Houdini, a proven clone of the Ippolit family. Of course everyone can test what he wants, but this ban of some single engines is not comprehensible.

[Thomas Mayer]

Hi Norman,

The authors have denied ever RE'ing Rybka

who ? names ? where ?

There's not a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing

well, there is the BB report and the very strange initial Ippolit source. And well, Vas says so... -> Anyway, you are right, there is no proof at all.

Strelka is accepted as a valid engine and tested by the CCRL
[...]
Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?

Agreed, this looks like double standards. The problem might be that you can't test everything, simply because of time troubles. To test the strongest available engine seams reasonable. Well, and some use the rule "only if there is a non anon behind the engine" - but then Fire is back in the game. So some might not test Fire because of your behaviour in the past which wasn't always acceptable. On the other hand you can't someone force to test something, just relax, sooner or later everything will be tested.

Greets, Thomas

[jdart]

The authors have denied ever RE'ing Rybka
There's not a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing
R. Vida and many others have expressed serious doubt that Ippolit is a clone of anything

I thought the authors were pretty open about Ippolit etc. being reverse-engineered. And one look at the Ippolit code would lead one to doubt that it was constructed line for line that way by a C coder. It is a bit mysterious what its exact lineage is, however.

[Thomas Mayer]

Hi Jon,

The authors have denied ever RE'ing Rybka
There's not a shred of evidence of any wrongdoing
R. Vida and many others have expressed serious doubt that Ippolit is a clone of anything

I thought the authors were pretty open about Ippolit etc. being reverse-engineered. And one look at the Ippolit code would lead one to doubt that it was constructed line for line that way by a C coder. It is a bit mysterious what its exact lineage is, however.

well, that would be a reason not to test the Ippo-derivatives at all. But not to test let's say Fire and to test Houdini feels strange, I think that is Normans point. And IMO it's a valid point.

Greets, Thomas

[jdart]

well, that would be a reason not to test the Ippo-derivatives at all. But not to test let's say Fire and to test Houdini feels strange, I think that is Normans point. And IMO it's a valid point.

I understand that. But testers get to choose what they test. Maybe they don't have a good reason for the choice, but it is still their choice. And if you don't like what is being tested, anyone with spare CPU cycles can run their own tests.

--Jon

[Thomas Mayer]

Hi Jon,

well, that would be a reason not to test the Ippo-derivatives at all. But not to test let's say Fire and to test Houdini feels strange, I think that is Normans point. And IMO it's a valid point.

I understand that. But testers get to choose what they test. Maybe they don't have a good reason for the choice, but it is still their choice. And if you don't like what is being tested, anyone with spare CPU cycles can run their own tests.

--Jon

yep, that's close to what I said, you can't force anyone to test something (or not to test something) - and I believe if Norman relaxes and keep on with good manners his creations will be once tested as well.

Greets, Thomas

[John Conway]

Strelka is accepted as a valid engine and tested by the CCRL:
http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/cg ... B%2064-bit
The establishment's golden-boy compiler (JA) is now collaborating with Jury on the compiles, apparently even adding 64-bit support

--------------
Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?


The hypocrisy and arbitrary standards confound the imagination!
The situation is ludicrous...and the responsibility/failure lies with the entrenched CCC 'Good-old boys' establishment.

Could it be because Osipov is thought to be a real person?
Or could it be that Osipov is thought to be honest?
Or could it simply be because Vas once made the mistake of claiming Strelka to be his own?

[kranium]

Strelka is accepted as a valid engine and tested by the CCRL:
http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/cg ... B%2064-bit
The establishment's golden-boy compiler (JA) is now collaborating with Jury on the compiles, apparently even adding 64-bit support

--------------
Yet, Ippolit engines are discredited and banned...and Strelka lauded and accepted?


The hypocrisy and arbitrary standards confound the imagination!
The situation is ludicrous...and the responsibility/failure lies with the entrenched CCC 'Good-old boys' establishment.

Could it be because Osipov is thought to be a real person?
Or could it be that Osipov is thought to be honest?
Or could it simply be because Vas once made the mistake of claiming Strelka to be his own?

yes, he's a real person...
he's probably honest...
yes Vas claimed Strelka was his own..

but, he RE's (clones) closed source commercial engines, and is praised/lauded for his work...
and the engines are accepted/tested/and celebrated...

isn't this exactly what the Ippolit authors are alleged to have done?

that's why 'I don't get it'...