Organising a computer chess event...

[bhlangonijr]

Hi.

Just for curiosity:

How is organised a computer chess event - for instance the WCCC?
Specifically:
- The engine's programmer is permitted to operate the computer?
- The computer operator must be affiliated to FIDE?
- How is synchronized the chessboard clock with the engine "go" parameters?
- Is it allowed to use xboard to serve as your GUI?
- if yes, is it allowed to enable xboard to play book moves instead of the engine?

more info is welcome.

PS: Please, don't bother answering this if there's a 'wiki' about that. Just send me the link.

[Tord Romstad]

I've never participated in the WCCC, but I guess the answers are the same as for most other computer chess tournaments.

- The engine's programmer is permitted to operate the computer?

Yes.

- The computer operator must be affiliated to FIDE?

No.

- How is synchronized the chessboard clock with the engine "go" parameters?

Usually, the operator gives the engine slightly less time than on the board clock, in order to give himself some time to transfer the moves. For instance, if the time control is 30 minutes per game with 10 seconds increment per move made, I would set my program to a level of 25 minutes per game with 8 seconds increment.

In most tournaments, it is also possible to ask the arbiter for permission to adjust the program's clock during the game.

- Is it allowed to use xboard to serve as your GUI?

Yes, usually it is allowed to use any GUI you want, even if you didn't write it.

- if yes, is it allowed to enable xboard to play book moves instead of the engine?

I am not sure if xboard contains book code, but in principle you are right: It is allowed to use GUI book code, even if the GUI was written by somebody else. It is also allowed to use somebody else's endgame tablebase code, even inside the search. I find this extremely strange, but most people seem to like it this way.

Tord

[hgm]

Yes, XBoard contains book code, now!

Not sure if you would be allowed to use someone else's book, though. WCRCC had rules against two participants using the same book.

Not sure what the rules are if two people use Polyglot to each build their own book, but start from the same collection of PGN files. (And thus get identically the same book on the binary level.)

[Tord Romstad]

Yes, XBoard contains book code, now!

Great!

Not sure if you would be allowed to use someone else's book, though. WCRCC had rules against two participants using the same book.

I think Bob used to say that it has actually happened that two WCCC participants have used exactly the same book.

Personally I even find it strange that two participants can use the same book code, but it's no big deal to me, and I realize that most people won't agree with me.

Tord

[hgm]

I agree with you. But I am sure people care even less about that!

[bhlangonijr]

Personally, I think it is a waste of time to write your own GUI, book and endgame code as such things are vastly available open source and it is unlikely you are going to add some new (substantial) value there.

For example, Glaurung book code was derived from Fabien's polyglot book code. Why would it sound less strange? Just because the code was typed by your own hands?

I think we should put our efforts implementing new ideas in search, better pruning (as you did) and Evaluation.

Thanks for the answers!

[Tord Romstad]

Personally, I think it is a waste of time to write your own GUI, book and endgame code as such things are vastly available open source and it is unlikely you are going to add some new (substantial) value there.

Why do you think so? I think there are great scopes for improvement in both areas, especially the opening.

For example, Glaurung book code was derived from Fabien's polyglot book code. Why would it sound less strange? Just because the code was typed by your own hands?

The only reason I support PolyGlot books is that users requested this feature -- it is not for tournament use. In tournaments, I use my own GUI book code.

And by the way, the PolyGlot book code is actually very loosely derived from the book code in an ancient Glaurung version. Fabien and I developed this stuff around the same time, and exchanged code and ideas frequently.

Tord

[bhlangonijr]

Why do you think so? I think there are great scopes for improvement in both areas, especially the opening.

I cannot visualize somehow improving read a move from a binary file in response a given chess position. This appeared to be so trivial.
Perhaps it is my lack of knowledge and you may clarify by what means you can improve this.

The only reason I support PolyGlot books is that users requested this feature -- it is not for tournament use. In tournaments, I use my own GUI book code.

Understood. But I still can't see why is strange to use other's GUI or book code.

[bob]

Yes, XBoard contains book code, now!

Great!

Not sure if you would be allowed to use someone else's book, though. WCRCC had rules against two participants using the same book.

I think Bob used to say that it has actually happened that two WCCC participants have used exactly the same book.

Personally I even find it strange that two participants can use the same book code, but it's no big deal to me, and I realize that most people won't agree with me.

Tord

It has happened. Bruce and I complained more than once when you get to face a _really_ good author's book in multiple rounds. I know that we both played against Kure's book at least twice in one WMCCC, but I don't really remember who/what/etc. I think that Chess Tiger, Rebel, and perhaps someone else used his book at the same time, but at least Tiger/Rebel did if my memory is correct.

Good books offer a significant advantage, as most realize..

And I _still_ don't like the idea of the GUI playing book moves. That means that in some games, the GUI will play _more_ moves than the engine will play, which is simply wrong.

[bob]

Personally, I think it is a waste of time to write your own GUI, book and endgame code as such things are vastly available open source and it is unlikely you are going to add some new (substantial) value there.

For example, Glaurung book code was derived from Fabien's polyglot book code. Why would it sound less strange? Just because the code was typed by your own hands?

I think we should put our efforts implementing new ideas in search, better pruning (as you did) and Evaluation.

Thanks for the answers!

It isn't just about "code" It is about "moves". A good book is not "generic", but is tailored to the capabilities of the engine that uses the book. Engine doesn't deal with pawn storms or opposite castling very well? Tune the book to avoid such games so that you don't play into your weaknesses. Know that a specific opponent has a weakness? Tune the book to play toward that weakness when possible.

That's why the engine needs to play the actual moves in the game, the GUI needs to be a "UI" (user interface) as opposed to part of the chess-playing entity...