Rating Lists and double standards for clones

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

User avatar
Harvey Williamson
Posts: 2010
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 11:12 pm
Location: Whitchurch. Shropshire, UK.
Full name: Harvey Williamson

Re: Rating Lists and double standards for clones

Post by Harvey Williamson »

carldaman wrote: ↑Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:25 pm Some of the derivatives/forks like Bluefish, SugaR and ShashChess are legal and do bring value in the form of an enhanced style of play. I don't mind seeing them listed on rating lists.
I think 'legal' derivatives being shown on ratings lists is fine as long as it is clearly shown what they are a derivative of. So that nobody is lead to belive they are an original engine. eg. FF2 should be shown as a member of the Stockfish family.
Top
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 27788
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: Rating Lists and double standards for clones

Post by hgm »

gonzochess75 wrote: ↑Sun Feb 21, 2021 10:20 pmNoted. Thanks for making clear how much/little TalkChess mods care for the concerns or opinions of top engine devs or their projects.
You are welcome!

If the developer of a top engine would be under the impression that only his opinion counts, and that the other 99% of Chess programmers should be ignored or shut up, it is a good thing that this misunderstanding is now corrected. :lol:
Top

Return to “Computer Chess Club: General Topics”