ACCA Comp Chess Challenge Match Ladder is now open to world

[CRoberson]

The ACCA membership has decided to open the challenge match
ladder to authors all over the world.

The idea is you challenge anyone on the ladder that is ahead of you
by 4 positions or less. The two of you negotiate the time, place and
date. You send that info to Charles for mass distribution.

Since the matches only last 2 hours and the dates and times are
negotiated between the opponents, this should work well for all
time zones including our friends and colleagues in New Zealand and
Australia.

On the date, your program plays a 4 game match at TC of G/14+1.
Matches last about 2 hours. If the lower ranked program finishes
with a score of 2.5 or better it moves up 1 rung above the opponent.

These matches are quite fun as several authors are online commenting
on the same match. This adds to the enjoyment considerably. Also,
there is no schedule. You can challenge anyone at any time.

The point of the ladder is to have fun and to provide a live opportunity
for authors to collaborate. It is not intended to provide a perfect rankning
of the programs.

Hopefully, with enough participants, we will have two challenge
matches per month (out of the whole of the authors).

I've discussed this with the ACCA membership, Richard Pijl and
Vincent Diepeveen and we think it should work well.

Web page at: http://www.taccl.org/Challenge.html

If you wish to participate or have questions, let me know.

Charles

[playjunior]

Charles, this is a really nice idea.
Matches between engines that are conducted by authors are very important to determine the real playing strength of a program.

[pedrox]

Charles, this is a really nice idea.
Matches between engines that are conducted by authors are very important to determine the real playing strength of a program.

True that an author can do maybe a better configuration than another operator, for example that my engine play with bitbases, but this list is not good because each engine plays in a different hardware.

[CRoberson]

Charles, this is a really nice idea.
Matches between engines that are conducted by authors are very important to determine the real playing strength of a program.

True that an author can do maybe a better configuration than another operator, for example that my engine play with bitbases, but this list is not good because each engine plays in a different hardware.

I said the list is mostly for fun and the communication between
authors. Also, the hardware issue isn't that big of a deal. Authors
with weak hardware may get an operator with good hardware as long
as the author is online as well.