TalkChess.com

If it was waiting for a good new generation of engine strength, then is that not already happening?
I think that Rybka 4.1 is already looking like a weak old program.

It took a long time for this to happen , but i think this is now the era where Rybka 4.1 is of little intererst anymore, except to see exactly HOW soundly it gets beaten by todays top engines.

(point being, to see which moves of Rybka which no one knew if they were REALLY all that great, ARE in fact not really all that great, due to newe engines which will show it to us. This is what _I_ call instructive entertainment).

This was only starting to happen in last TCEC, but now, this might be very clear.

And then, there is the FRC idea which i thoroughly enjoyed last time it was up on the TCEC.

Last I heard, Martin was doing a hardware upgrade and it was taking time to select components, build the machine, and run testing. As for FRC, he has already said he won't be doing that again because the audiences weren't high enough for his liking. Maybe he will change his mind.

I would have thought that the greatest of chess minds, and especially computer chess minds, would be absolutely CRAZY over such FRC matches.

You can see what evaluation lines are whilst it is playing, online, and you can study occasional returns to any of the 960 opening positions. You can get to the bottom (eventually) of many intriguing chess questions.

Is it really not fascinating enough?

(And i strongly wish for a major database and documentation of different ideas and notes and comments for each of the the 959 other opening positions and resulting games).

For the TCEC final SF vs Komodo, FRC is perfect. Currently Martin and his helpers spend dozens of hours trying to select conventional chess openings, with the usual arguments about balance, length of the book etc. etc. For FRC just select random openings, play reversed sides, and it is job done. And with the engines playing from move 1, it is a perfect stress test for them.

Modern Times wrote:For the TCEC final SF vs Komodo, FRC is perfect. Currently Martin and his helpers spend dozens of hours trying to select conventional chess openings, with the usual arguments about balance, length of the book etc. etc. For FRC just select random openings, play reversed sides, and it is job done. And with the engines playing from move 1, it is a perfect stress test for them.

Seemingly the only major advantages of this chess variation....

It's a variation of chess,not real chess at least the way I see it....
Dr.D

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:

Modern Times wrote:For the TCEC final SF vs Komodo, FRC is perfect. Currently Martin and his helpers spend dozens of hours trying to select conventional chess openings, with the usual arguments about balance, length of the book etc. etc. For FRC just select random openings, play reversed sides, and it is job done. And with the engines playing from move 1, it is a perfect stress test for them.

Seemingly the only major advantages of this chess variation....

It's a variation of chess,not real chess at least the way I see it....
Dr.D

So how about a computer playing a game without an opening book?

Is that also a "variation" of chess?

S.Taylor wrote:

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:

Modern Times wrote:For the TCEC final SF vs Komodo, FRC is perfect. Currently Martin and his helpers spend dozens of hours trying to select conventional chess openings, with the usual arguments about balance, length of the book etc. etc. For FRC just select random openings, play reversed sides, and it is job done. And with the engines playing from move 1, it is a perfect stress test for them.

Seemingly the only major advantages of this chess variation....

It's a variation of chess,not real chess at least the way I see it....
Dr.D

So how about a computer playing a game without an opening book?

Is that also a "variation" of chess?

I really would like to see all the games in matches like these played without books. I think the problem is there may be to many repeat openings without books. I use a very short book for my matches.
I really do enjoy FRC games.

S.Taylor wrote:

Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:

Modern Times wrote:For the TCEC final SF vs Komodo, FRC is perfect. Currently Martin and his helpers spend dozens of hours trying to select conventional chess openings, with the usual arguments about balance, length of the book etc. etc. For FRC just select random openings, play reversed sides, and it is job done. And with the engines playing from move 1, it is a perfect stress test for them.

Seemingly the only major advantages of this chess variation....

It's a variation of chess,not real chess at least the way I see it....
Dr.D

So how about a computer playing a game without an opening book?

Is that also a "variation" of chess?

Where the pieces placed where it should be the answer is no

Then one of the starting positions in FRC, IS the normal setting. Is that then a chess variant if the setting came about via FRC shuffle?


And besides that,
I would say that it takes something a bit more substantial to make it into a chess variant. e.g. 3 bishops or other pieces in different numbers, or different placing of pawns, or even a different rule. There is none of these in FRC.

As much as I like to be hopeful, I'm sure Martin just won't do it. He will get higher audiences for standard chess. Mind you, the last time he ran FRC, Komodo didn't support it, so straight away because there was no SF vs Komodo final, a large proportion of the audience stayed away. It could well be different this time.