Strongest chess event ever - TODAY

[Uri Blass]

Certainly not the strongest chess event.

I believe correspondence chess tournament events when most players use rybka for analysis are at higher level.Uri

Do you know where I can get freely downloadable database of Pgn's/cbh's from correspondence games?

http://www.iccf-webchess.com/Tables2.aspx

for example
choose
ICCF tournaments->world championships->WC finals->WC 23 final and you get the following table

http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCross ... x?id=13581

There is get pgn link.

You can do the same for many server tournament that are in the tables
including one tournament when I play when you can see also unfinished games with 5 move delay.

http://www.iccf-webchess.com/EventCross ... x?id=16587

Uri

[Mike S.]

In defense of the ICGA, or rather of Rémi Coulom if he takes care of that, I need to mention that the main page for the WCCC is well done. Detailed schedule, tables, quick updates after each round, , games for viewing and downloading... only the hardware infos are incomplete yet.

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/t ... php?id=192

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Certainly not the strongest chess event.

I believe correspondence chess tournament events when most players use rybka for analysis are at higher level.

Maybe the strongest computer chess event but I am even not sure about it and I am even not sure that it is stronger than WCCC.

Even if Rybka is stronger on a cluster you should remember that Junior does not participate so it is possible that the average level of WCCC is higher.

Uri

Junior has always been a decent tournament player with a good preparation,but not that strong when it comes to the rating lists....

[CThinker]

http://www.grappa.univ-lille3.fr/icga/t ... php?id=198

Deep Sjeng: 56 node cluster
Rybka: 54 node cluster
Shredder: 8 core 3.2Ghz Nehalem
Equinox: don't know, at least 8x 2.66Ghz Xeon

Timecontrol 60 + 10.

http://www.soloajedrez.com/wccc2009

Congratulations to Rybka and Sjeng for pushing the development of computer chess. Whereas we see a lot of talk on how difficult it is to create a good cluster chess, Rybka and Sjeng just went ahead and created one.

Sjeng put up a good fight but lost. Still, my hats off to GCP.

[Rémi Coulom]

What is wrong with this picture?

You have to ask someone else to provide information so that you can update the ICGA web site? Talk about organizational skills, the ICGA doesn't seem to have any. Of course this is not exactly a news flash for those of us that have been involved with these events for any length of time.

Jeez...

Hi Bob,

I understand your frustration, and that of Gian-Carlo. I am sometimes irritated by the ICGA, too.

But the ICGA is nothing more than what its members decide to make of it. There are periodic elections, and anybody is welcome to be a candidate for president. And any volunteer is welcome to help with organization. Being president of the ICGA, or organizing a big event like the ICGA tournaments is a lot of work. You won't find candidates for that job easily.

It is also very unfair to give the responsability of the decaying interest in computer chess to the ICGA. Since 1997, all computer chess tournaments have decayed. Programs are too strong, algorithms have not changed in more than 10 years. Nobody except a few freaks is still interested in computer chess. Interest in computer chess will continue to decay, whatever anybody does.

Without the efforts of the ICGA, the WCCC would have been dead long ago. And constantly bashing in the forums will not help.

Rémi

[Dann Corbit]

What is wrong with this picture?

You have to ask someone else to provide information so that you can update the ICGA web site? Talk about organizational skills, the ICGA doesn't seem to have any. Of course this is not exactly a news flash for those of us that have been involved with these events for any length of time.

Jeez...

Hi Bob,

I understand your frustration, and that of Gian-Carlo. I am sometimes irritated by the ICGA, too.

But the ICGA is nothing more than what its members decide to make of it. There are periodic elections, and anybody is welcome to be a candidate for president. And any volunteer is welcome to help with organization. Being president of the ICGA, or organizing a big event like the ICGA tournaments is a lot of work. You won't find candidates for that job easily.

I think the ICGA is dysfunctional. Why will someone want to try to steer that boat?

It is also very unfair to give the responsability of the decaying interest in computer chess to the ICGA. Since 1997, all computer chess tournaments have decayed.

Don't think so. The internet events get bigger and bigger.
Organizations like SSDF (and also) CCRL and CEGT produce far more interesting and meaningful results than short tournaments.

Programs are too strong, algorithms have not changed in more than 10 years.

There are still fresh new ideas.
There were no cluster chess programs ten years ago.
Nobody achieved a working branch factor of 2 ten years ago.

Nobody except a few freaks is still interested in computer chess. Interest in computer chess will continue to decay, whatever anybody does.

Given:
http://www.rwbc-chess.de/wb_chron_date.htm
There were 40 chess engines written before the year 2000.
There were 281 written between 2000 and 2005
There were 149 written between 2006 and today, with 40 in the last 12 months (as many as between 1991 and the end of 1999).
It does not look to be decaying to me.

Without the efforts of the ICGA, the WCCC would have been dead long ago. And constantly bashing in the forums will not help.

Rémi

The ICGA is killing itself. Eventually, something will take its place.
If the ICGA falls, another world championship will take its place.
I hope that the ICGA does revive but I don't see that happening given their history over the last decade.

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

But the ICGA is nothing more than what its members decide to make of it. There are periodic elections, and anybody is welcome to be a candidate for president.

Elections. Elections for the members of the Executive Committee will be held at each
Triennial Meeting, with elected officers taking on their duties at the end of that
meeting. Nominations are to be made by petition no later than three (3) months
before the elections. The ICGA Journal will announce the candidates at least two (2)
months before the election. At least five (5) members’ signatures are required on each
nominating petition. All candidates for election must have been members of the
ICGA for no less than two (2) years. Officers are elected by a majority of those
present and voting by secret, written ballot. Runoffs will be held if no candidate
receives a simple majority. The candidate with the least votes will be eliminated from
the ballot for each runoff, until one candidate receives the simple majority.

And any volunteer is welcome to help with organization. Being president of the ICGA, or organizing a big event like the ICGA tournaments is a lot of work. You won't find candidates for that job easily.

This is true. I know from first-hand experience

It is also very unfair to give the responsability of the decaying interest in computer chess to the ICGA. Since 1997, all computer chess tournaments have decayed. Programs are too strong, algorithms have not changed in more than 10 years. Nobody except a few freaks is still interested in computer chess. Interest in computer chess will continue to decay, whatever anybody does.

Where am I (solely) blaming the ICGA for this?

If anything, they could be blamed for not realizing this reality has changed. The current WCCC format is a nice example of this. It made some sense when computer chess was a big business with large monetary gains to be made. It makes much less sense now.

You advance or you die. The current organisation is sitting still or degrading, and it will die.

If computer chess gets too dead to be interesting, I'll move on to something new and compete in that.

Without the efforts of the ICGA, the WCCC would have been dead long ago.

This I do not believe at all. It probably wouldn't look like the event looks now, though. But I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

[Marc Lacrosse]

Certainly not the strongest chess event.

I believe correspondence chess tournament events when most players use rybka for analysis are at higher level.Uri

Do you know where I can get freely downloadable database of Pgn's/cbh's from correspondence games?

ICCF game archive :
http://www.iccf.com/content/index.php?o ... &Itemid=81

IECG game archive :
http://www.iecg.org/garchive.htm

FICGS game archive :
http://www.ficgs.com/databases/chess.pgn

AJEC (french corr. chess federation) game archive :
ftp://ftp.ajec-echecs.org:45000/bdd/ajec.cbv

Marc

[IanO]

If anything, they could be blamed for not realizing this reality has changed. The current WCCC format is a nice example of this. It made some sense when computer chess was a big business with large monetary gains to be made. It makes much less sense now.

I agree. The rating list agencies provide a good forum for statistically significant results, and internet tournaments like the ICCT (and computer Go's monthly KGS tournaments) allow for much broader participation. I would welcome a World Championship title granted via an internet tournament.

If computer chess gets too dead to be interesting, I'll move on to something new and compete in that.

Speaking of which, why haven't you entered Leela into the computer Go events?

Ian

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

If computer chess gets too dead to be interesting, I'll move on to something new and compete in that.

Speaking of which, why haven't you entered Leela into the computer Go events?

Ian

I'm not on site and there was no operator for Leela.