Why don't strong engines enter WCCC?

[Sedat Canbaz]

3. Ever since Rybka was banned for being an unacknowledged derivative of Fruit, you've seen less participation. ICGA has just recently been also investigating past participants Thinker and Loop. I think closed-source engine authors don't want to have that level of scrutiny and potential controversy.
--Jon

exactly...
+1

Plus 2.

Plus 3

[Uri Blass]

What makes this argument pretty weak is that "ever since" apparently just means "on one single occasion, when it was in Japan", and that it is the open-source programs (Stockfish, Ippo-derivartives) that are most sorely missed by those complaining about participation. And Don Dailey was never afraid to have Komodo scrutinized, as his participation in CCT and subsequent examination of his source code have demonstrated.

No amount of plusses is going to change those facts, and no amount of plusses will make a false statement correct...

I think that it can be correct if you add the word part.

In other words change:
"I think closed-source engine authors don't want to have that level of scrutiny and potential controversy." to
"I think part of the closed-source engine authors don't want to have that level of scrutiny and potential controversy."

[Modern Times]

"I think part of the closed-source engine authors don't want to have that level of scrutiny and potential controversy."

And add to that, they don't want other engine authors/competitors to see their code. It would be helpful if the ICGA were to state that their panel of experts who would scrutinise the code would not include any current engine author. Of course that presents difficulties, but for example retired engine authors might be a good choice.

[jdart]

You can say the participation has not gone down, and if you just count number of engines, that is correct. But the top engines are missing, notably and consistently.. that is not a success for ICGA.

--Jon

[Sedat Canbaz]

It would be helpful if the ICGA were to state that their panel of experts who would scrutinise the code would not include any current engine author. Of course that presents difficulties, but for example retired engine authors might be a good choice.

Your idea sounds good...

I think it is not required especially to be retired authors...
Because mostly of the retired authors are not active in computer chess

Btw, what about for some notable names:

Fabien Letouzey
Jon Dart
Marco Costalba
Miguel Ballicora
Robert Hyatt
Uri Blass

[Uri Blass]

It would be helpful if the ICGA were to state that their panel of experts who would scrutinise the code would not include any current engine author. Of course that presents difficulties, but for example retired engine authors might be a good choice.

Your idea sounds good...

I think it is not required especially to be retired authors...
Because mostly of the retired authors are not active in computer chess

Btw, what about for some notable names:

Fabien Letouzey
Jon Dart
Marco Costalba
Robert Hyatt
Uri Blass

I think that it is a bad idea because people will claim that these authors have a personal interest.

Robert Hyatt was already in the panel of experts that decided to ban rybka.

[Sedat Canbaz]

It would be helpful if the ICGA were to state that their panel of experts who would scrutinise the code would not include any current engine author. Of course that presents difficulties, but for example retired engine authors might be a good choice.

Your idea sounds good...

I think it is not required especially to be retired authors...
Because mostly of the retired authors are not active in computer chess

Btw, what about for some notable names:

Fabien Letouzey
Jon Dart
Marco Costalba
Miguel Ballicora
Robert Hyatt
Uri Blass

I think that it is a bad idea because people will claim that these authors have a personal interest.

Robert Hyatt was already in the panel of experts that decided to ban rybka.

Sure...if in the panel of experts there is only one or two notable name/s

Actually there is a solution,
For example, this can be done via voting (in a democratic way) in case of checking the originality of the participants

[Uri Blass]

It would be helpful if the ICGA were to state that their panel of experts who would scrutinise the code would not include any current engine author. Of course that presents difficulties, but for example retired engine authors might be a good choice.

Your idea sounds good...

I think it is not required especially to be retired authors...
Because mostly of the retired authors are not active in computer chess

Btw, what about for some notable names:

Fabien Letouzey
Jon Dart
Marco Costalba
Robert Hyatt
Uri Blass

I think that it is a bad idea because people will claim that these authors have a personal interest.

Robert Hyatt was already in the panel of experts that decided to ban rybka.

Sure...if in the panel of experts there is only one or two notable name/s

Actually there is a solution,
For example, this can be done via voting (in a democratic way) in case of checking the originality of the participants

Plus I don't understand what kind of personal interest can be ?

The claim is that people who participate in computer world championship may want to ban stonger programs so they increase their chances to win.

[Sedat Canbaz]

The claim is that people who participate in computer world championship may want to ban stonger programs so they increase their chances to win.

Ok...of course I understand...

But once more I'd like to point out

Actually there is a solution,
For example, this can be done via voting (in a democratic way) in case of checking the originality of the participants

[Sedat Canbaz]

Continuing...

Actually we can organize serious chess engine competitions (better than WCCC)

I think the below name is not bad:
World Chess Engine Tournament (WCET)

And I can recommend Frank Quisinsky as a main tournament director, who can manage to organize such events!
Frank is very honest and experienced in computer chess, plus Frank's rules are quite strict against clones!!

Of course,
Chess engine experts advice will be always appreciated to help us about which chess engine is original or not

But however exception experts advise...
We need urgently a new tool (a similar as Don's tool), which can help to determine the originality of chess programs

For example, I can recommend:
As a server: Playchess
Time Control: 40 Moves in 120 Minutes
Swiss System (9 Rounds)
Ponder ON
Own Opening Books
etc...

And I think it will be not bad if,
The Winners (Top 3 standings) and the Tournament Director to be awarded by sponsors!!

What is your opinion about my new idea ?)