Discussion of computer chess matches and engine tournaments.
Moderators: hgm, Dann Corbit, Harvey Williamson
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
-
fenchel
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 5:01 am
Post
by fenchel » Mon Nov 16, 2015 6:10 pm
Graham Banks wrote:The improvement I'd most like to see is watching the engines think as it's their move.
I think this is a very nice suggestion. Ideally the evolution of the pv could be watched on the little pv boards, perhaps with some delayed updates to make it comprehensible.
I believe there was a suggestion elsewhere (maybe by Ray or Graham?) that the winning threshold 6.5 be increased. I agree with this; with draws so common and with the engines seeing so far, it's very statisfying to get a few more moves.
-
Dirt
- Posts: 2851
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:01 pm
- Location: Irvine, CA, USA
Post
by Dirt » Tue Nov 17, 2015 1:33 am
fenchel wrote:JJJ wrote:Maybe TC is too long ?
The problem is 4 straight hours of moves eval'd to 0.0 by both engines, which seems to occur often.
The TCEC draw rule should prevent that. Five moves with no capture or pawn advance will result in a draw if the absolute values of the scores are less or equal to 0.05. Stockfish seems too optimistic to let that happen much.
Deasil is the right way to go.
-
Jhoravi
- Posts: 284
- Joined: Wed May 08, 2013 4:49 am
Post
by Jhoravi » Sat Nov 21, 2015 2:11 pm
More openings with opposite side castling! That will create imbalance right from the start
-
FriedmannC
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Fri Feb 10, 2012 6:58 pm
- Location: SUCEAVA, ROMANIA
Post
by FriedmannC » Mon Dec 28, 2015 3:57 pm
For exciting games and less draws:
1. less time - 60'/15" or 90'/30"- or without increment
2. every engine on maximum 8 cores
3. Jeroen Noomen test suites, Silver test suite, Arasan test suite, critical lines and sharp variations of many openings
4. the final should be played on a single core for each engine and should include a 5 minutes blitz match without increment
-
Hai
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:19 am
Post
by Hai » Mon Dec 28, 2015 4:31 pm
FriedmannC wrote:For exciting games and less draws:
1. less time - 60'/15" or 90'/30"- or without increment
2. every engine on maximum 8 cores
3. Jeroen Noomen test suites, Silver test suite, Arasan test suite, critical lines and sharp variations of many openings
4. the final should be played on a single core for each engine and should include a 5 minutes blitz match without increment
1. Is good because less draws and MUCH more games.
2. and 4. Is the wrong way to decrease the draw rate.
3. Is stupid because games will be played without opening phase and this is bad because 2 engines can have the same elo but one of them could be 150 elo stronger in the opening phase and couldn't take advantage of his strength. It will also increase the draw rate compared to: the 20 possible opening moves.
-
mar
- Posts: 2262
- Joined: Fri Nov 26, 2010 1:00 pm
- Location: Czech Republic
- Full name: Martin Sedlak
Post
by mar » Mon Dec 28, 2015 5:00 pm
Graham Banks wrote:The chatroom could be tidied up a bit too - too much crap goes on in there.
Right, never seen such a dense concentration of trolls in a single place.
This is the reason why I decided to not participate anymore - not that it would matter of course;
there are much better new engines like Andscacs and Nirvana.
Also I don't like the role of a "doormat"
But the tournament itself is good.
-
Gurcan Uckardes
- Posts: 196
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2014 11:42 pm
-
Contact:
Post
by Gurcan Uckardes » Thu Dec 31, 2015 4:51 pm
Martin if u mean Cheng won't be there in Tcec9, let me express my disagreement and my wish to see it playing. I like Cheng.

-
Hai
- Posts: 548
- Joined: Sun Aug 04, 2013 11:19 am
Post
by Hai » Sat Apr 09, 2016 9:44 am
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 34847
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 9:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Post
by Graham Banks » Tue Apr 12, 2016 8:52 pm
One correction - Laser is not brand new.
It has appeared in rating lists for a while now.
gbanksnz at gmail.com