World Computer Chess Championship 2015

[IWB]

for some games I had the same impression, but from outside its not so easy to say as when you are directly involved

Hi Clemens,

Sitting at the tourney I had the same impression. Book making is highly overestimated and the biggest thing with them is their ego - and I am a bookmaker now as well

Bye
Ingo

PS: I am perfectly happy of not having blundered a game oob (until now!)

[Norm Pollock]

In the equal? Hardware event I would like to also see a uniform book limitation of about 12 moves maximum. Make things level so we can find the best engine.

[hgm]

Uniform evaluation would also help, to see who has the best search.

Or perhaps we should require them all to have both the same search and evaluation, to see who writes the fastest code!

[Uri Blass]

Uniform evaluation would also help, to see who has the best search.

Or perhaps we should require them all to have both the same search and evaluation, to see who writes the fastest code!

Or perhaps we should require them all to have also the same code to see who has more luck.

[Hugo]

Uniform evaluation would also help, to see who has the best search.

Or perhaps we should require them all to have both the same search and evaluation, to see who writes the fastest code!

Or perhaps we should require them all to have also the same code to see who has more luck.

superb !!

[CatPower]

No information on the engine versions used anywhere?

[jefk]

[quote="Jeroen"]
You cannot win tournaments by playing such lines .[/quote]

both books probably are gambling, that is have book moves
with a certain frequency of playing a move (the Hiarcs book
certainly has that, that's known; the Noomen books also
used to have that, although you sometimes did some last
minute tuning, to improve the chances, was my impression).

Books trying to play the ' best' book move, whatever
that may be, would play stronger in computer chess.
Some chess knowledge in the area of opening theory
also maybe help, accepting a gambit pawn in the QGA is only
helping White, but if White plays a move as Bb3, then he
might be losing his advantage again. Rather poor book
performance from both sides imho indeed.

jef

[CatPower]

As for the book lines, we gave Erdo specific instructions on what we wanted in the book, and he is doing a great job carrying them out.
.

Then the strategy did not work out? How can Komodo team be satisfied with tournament result given that points were lost against weaker opponents?

[jefk]

[quote="I
Sitting at the tourney I had the same impression. Book making is highly overestimated [/quote]

sofar, books gambling with their moves fail to impress me.
For the rest, with hardware and opening theory being
the most important factors for engines at top level (say
2800+), engine programming is highly overestimated.

at ICC i'm ranked nr one with my book, having used
various engines, Stockfish, now also K9 sometimes
but in the past others, doesn't matter. Only thing i
need to get at nr 1 for standard is faster hardware.
Which specific (top)engine doesn't matter that
much anymore; improving some Elo points per year
or so also are indicating this. Books and hardware rule.
But also only for a certain period of time,
at which point we still will see interesting games,
but with a known result (1/2-1/2)

jef

[reflectionofpower]

Doing battle with Erdo and Mark of team Komodo in Leiden.

Honestly, I want to hear more about the drinking stories than the matches.