World Computer Chess Championship

[Kotlov]

Everyone knows which engine is the best, without any championship...

[pedrox]

Spectators
Here's where TCEC is the champion with superb online coverage. Even though improvements have been made by the ICGA and other tournaments by providing online coverage, this is still a point where improvements can be made. But also here there have been initiatives in the past that show how this can be done. I remember the WCCC in Pamplona where there was a live stream with comment (in Spanish though) by a leading chess journalist (don't remember his name but I'm sure someone else can help here). However, spectators that are going to the venue as well, will be able to talk to the programmer's present. In TCEC that's possible with the authors that are in the chat window.

Richard.

The journalist is Leontxo Garcia, he is considered the best chess journalist in Spanish. Leontxo has the sufficient level to comment technically the games, but in addition his retransmissions are amusing because he counts numerous interesting anecdotes related to chess.

[pijl]

The journalist is Leontxo Garcia, he is considered the best chess journalist in Spanish. Leontxo has the sufficient level to comment technically the games, but in addition his retransmissions are amusing because he counts numerous interesting anecdotes related to chess.

Yes, that's the one. Thx Pedro.

[mjlef]

I don't really know how +200 elo engine can be a "derivative".
It's like... All engines are derivatives of Crafty, Fruit, Stockfish in some ways. If someone takes stockfish code and improves it by 200 elo, well, it's not stockfish anymore either way.

As you can read in the snippet of my previous post one reason the ICGA insists participants to have written their code from scratch is that programmers have complained Rybka had an unfair advantage by starting from Fruit, which BTW did not even happen. So no derivatives allowed, unfair competition.

It's crazy to see an organization to promote computer chess has become an obstacle to progress. The world has changed, everyone has moved on except for the ICGA that still wants to live in the previous century with outdated rules.

I see Ed has reformatted the same misleading information. I recommend anyone interested in seeing the data compiled by the investigation panel review it themselves her: http://icga.wikispaces.com/Rybka-Fruit%20Controversy. You will find links and summaries of the information all there.

You entirely missing the point I was making and in your reply only concentrate on the "which BTW" part which was added to avoid that folks get the impression I have changed my mind.

Therefore allow me to say it more blunt - by banning Rybka --- since the ICGA called it a derivative --- you have set a precedent that will hunt you until you come to your senses. Basically your organization insist that every participant is obliged to have his engine written from scratch.

In the meantime (and 7 years after) I expected something better but it is still the same old angry men gang that insists talented programmers to go through the same old shit (from scratch) because they had to.

You are a laugh to computer chess.

"come to my senses"? What is that supposed to mean? Your words sound full of anger, not mine. Anyway, I in no way feel "hunted". You are the only one seeming to hunt me, if by hunting presenting the same flawed arguments. The decision was made by other people, not me. Remember this was an investigation by a group of programmers and was simply fact finding. I feel your arguments are flawed and invite anyone interested to read the evidence directly.

[velmarin]

It's strange to see this fight of illustrious programmers.

Although Mark (and Komodo)'s situation as a participant and member of the ICGA seems "politically incorrect.
It doesn't look like it, it is.
I think it should be rectified.

[mjlef]

It's strange to see this fight of illustrious programmers.

Although Mark (and Komodo)'s situation as a participant and member of the ICGA seems "politically incorrect.
It doesn't look like it, it is.
I think it should be rectified.

I understand your concern. When I started working on Komodo, I told David Levy that I thought some might consider it a conflict of interest being both the Komodo programmer and the ICGA Programmer's Representative. I wrote him:

"Don and Larry Kaufamn have been looking for some co-developers for Komodo. After a search, I told him I was willing to help him out. If Don passes away, Don's wife, Larry and I would share in whatever profits Komodo brings.

Since this would put me in as a programmer/developer for one of the top 3 or so chess programs, you might be concerned it could cause conflict or other people's concerns with me being the ICGA Programmers Representative,..."

His response was "I would have absolutely no problem at all with your being the ICGA's Programmer Representative, and very much hope that you will stand for re-election. But the decision is not up to me". Others with ICGA expressed the same opinion.

I do not know of anyone else expressing interest in this job and I know of no one who has even run for the position while I have it. But I am more than happy to stand down should anyone qualified wants to run for the position. It is pretty much powerless, and just involves posting things on the web site, connecting new programmers to the rest of ICGA. And some occasional posts on the ICGA facebook page. Anyone interested can contact me or David Levy.

Mark

[mjlef]

The journalist is Leontxo Garcia, he is considered the best chess journalist in Spanish. Leontxo has the sufficient level to comment technically the games, but in addition his retransmissions are amusing because he counts numerous interesting anecdotes related to chess.

Yes, that's the one. Thx Pedro.

I posted the schedule for WCCC events on icga.org

Not it mentions "There will be an International Grandmaster present in Stockholm to comment on the games for spectators in the tournament hall and online." So it looks like WCCC will have some live commentary this year. If I find out who it will be I will post that also.

[mjlef]

The journalist is Leontxo Garcia, he is considered the best chess journalist in Spanish. Leontxo has the sufficient level to comment technically the games, but in addition his retransmissions are amusing because he counts numerous interesting anecdotes related to chess.

Yes, that's the one. Thx Pedro.

I posted the schedule for WCCC events on http://icga.leidenuniv.nl/

Not it mentions "There will be an International Grandmaster present in Stockholm to comment on the games for spectators in the tournament hall and online." So it looks like WCCC will have some live commentary this year. If I find out who it will be I will post that also.

[mjlef]

Regarding your loan rejection, in the United States, anytime you apply for credit becomes a part of your credit record. This is because people who apply for a lot of credit often are bad credit risks. And since any loans you do take out become part of your credit report, it is not hard for a future lender to see you were rejected (although they would not know why).

A future lender yes, and there are strict controls as to who can access your credit record, and even then only with your permission. Certainly not available to the public at large.

I think rejecting an engine and not letting others know why is lack of transparency. All of this is up to the ICGA Board,

Not a lack of transparency at all, it is a matter of Privacy. Only if you think laws have been broken would you go further, and then you'd pass the information on to the appropriate authorities, not the world at large.

Give it up, it's still the same "name and shame them on the internet" mentality what's driving them.

While in the meantime Komodo (and many others) has taken more stuff from other sources than Vas ever did from Fruit.

Ah, I see you are trying the Tu Quoque Fallacy now.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque The thing is, saying someone else breaks a rule in no way lessens the fact that the original person broke that rule.

You also present no evidence at all that "Komodo (and many others) has taken more stuff from other sources than Vas ever did from Fruit." It is not true for Komodo. You like making outlandish claims backed up with no facts at all. The Panel presented information on the Rybka - Fruit this is documented on the web site. You claim things against Komodo and present not a shred of evidence.

So, lets use Vasik's own admission. He posted about Strelka "I've taken a look this morning at the Strelka 2.0 sources. The picture is quite clear.

Vast sections of these sources started their life as a decompiled Rybka 1.0. The traces of this are everywhere. The board representation is identical, and all sorts of absolutely unique Rybka code methods, bitboard tricks and even exact data tables are used throughout." You can read the whole thing here: http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=3006

Fabien Letouzey wrote, after examining Strelka "It was however a whole re-write (copy with different words if you like, similar to a translation) of the algorithms. Not just an extraction of a couple of ideas as is common, and normal." You can read that here http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1014

So Vas says Strelka stole from Rybka. And Fabien says Strelka is a rewrite of Fruit. How can both be true unless Rybka is derived from Fruit. Remember, these are Vasik's own words. And anyone can examine the Strelka code and see it is indeed a rewrite of Fruit.

[velmarin]

Mark

I think a world title is very important to Komodo.
Their arguments may be legal, but they conflict with fairness.
It shouldn't take another candidate for you to resign.
In fact, his publications show a little bit of partiality.
Suppose a program with doubts is presented and the leadership of Komodo lurks.....
If you are now a commercial programmer, it seems that your place is not impartial.