Daniel Mehrmann wrote:
I just want to have some answers in the Strelka case
Best,
Daniel
I think we'd all like some clear indisputable answers regarding Strelka.
I don't have any problems with criticisms or discussions about CCRL.
I think what has got you offside with many was your Strelka or Homer ultimatum.
And I don't think you're a bad person at all.
I respect you as a programmer and I enjoy testing your engine.
I would hope there would be no bad blood if I continued to test it.
Regards, Graham.
Hi Graham,
i think the same about you
Homer can be tested anyway and i still hope your internal CCRL group talk is not off yet and maybe some viewpoints will be changing now.
I tryed my best anyway and i'll don't resign fast.
Best,
Daniel
Bravo Daniel,I admire deeply your reply and like Graham I also think that you are cool,not cooler than me of course
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Why are you showing such disrespect and ignorance to the CCRL team
And what is your aim to draft from the main topic of the thread and tell us that only few lucky people can get your engine
Keep it private,it's your right and no one can argue it,but the majority of the computer chess freaks will stop to give a damn about your Baron,be sure about that....
It is not disrespect. I just don't care. The results of the CCRL (and other test groups) have no meaning for me as they are not using the latest Baron version. So I do not care about which engines are on these lists either. I still hope the testers have fun in making these lists for those that do care.
The fact that the latest Baron is not available for CCRL and similar lists is just to explain my lack of interest in these lists, not to rub it into your nose that you cannot get it.
And if the majority of the chess freaks do not use the Baron: What else is new? It still make it available for the minority that does. Just not the most recent version.
Richard.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Why are you showing such disrespect and ignorance to the CCRL team
It is not disrespect. I just don't care. The results of the CCRL (and other test groups) have no meaning for me as they are not using the latest Baron version.
Richard.
No offense was taken at all. Rating lists aren't everybody's cup of tea.
The Baron is an engine with an attractive playing style and I thank you for providing a new version every now and then.
Best luck with your efforts.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Why are you showing such disrespect and ignorance to the CCRL team
And what is your aim to draft from the main topic of the thread and tell us that only few lucky people can get your engine
Keep it private,it's your right and no one can argue it,but the majority of the computer chess freaks will stop to give a damn about your Baron,be sure about that....
It is not disrespect. I just don't care. The results of the CCRL (and other test groups) have no meaning for me as they are not using the latest Baron version. So I do not care about which engines are on these lists either. I still hope the testers have fun in making these lists for those that do care.
The fact that the latest Baron is not available for CCRL and similar lists is just to explain my lack of interest in these lists, not to rub it into your nose that you cannot get it.
And if the majority of the chess freaks do not use the Baron: What else is new? It still make it available for the minority that does. Just not the most recent version.
Richard.
Thanks Richard for taking the time to answer and I wish you luck for the future plans in making the Baron stronger....
Still waiting for a MP version of the Baron ,
Dr.Wael Deeb
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
pijl wrote: From the viewpoint of a user: Why should he care where the programmer started from. If he made a significant improvement, they will welcome it,
This is certainly NOT my viewpoint as a user... but it's true, there seem to be some who think like that. But I doubt that they are a majority among the users and I don't really understand them. If we consider having something like a computer chess community, we should try to keep at least a minimum of civilised standards. Also, if engines like that would be widely accepted, many programmers will be discouraged (some may care more for rankings etc. than you). And for the user, a flood of similar engines is not favourable compared to having more ambitious and unique engines.
Of course I put two opposites together in my post. I know many of the users/testers that hate clones perhaps even more than I do. And I understand the argument about the motivation of programmers a lot. Accepting Gridchess/Toga into WCCC was for me a slap in the face, and made me consider to withdraw from WCCC myself (and with it probably also from computer chess). I did not, because I did not want this incident to spoil the last 6 years of fun that I had, and as far as I'm concerned, at least another 6 years to come, meeting other people with the same hobby.
And about rankings: I'm really self-centered. If others test the Baron, I mainly care about the relative position of it compared to previous versions and perhaps some of the engines of friends.
The ease with which an engine can be cloned or used as a base for 'your-own' leaves me no choice. The energy it will take to worry about that will remove the fun that is left in me.
Richard.
Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:
Thanks Richard for taking the time to answer and I wish you luck for the future plans in making the Baron stronger....
Still waiting for a MP version of the Baron ,
Dr.Wael Deeb
I always try to answer when I think I have something to clarify or when I think I can clarify a bit better. English is not my first language and sometimes cannot express myself as clearly as I would hope.
About the Baron MP: I'm afraid that with the current source base of the Baron it is not a good idea to release it. It is not as stable as the single CPU version and due to some of the design decisions I made a long time ago that is not easy to improve.
Richard.
