Suggestions for new CCT rules

[garybelton]

I know that you meant the 1-0 and 0-1 games, no need to apologize. It was still funny here

[Sedat Canbaz]

I'm not suggesting a hardware limit

In other words,you suggest only book move limit ?!
So that's funny to me too

[garybelton]

25..Rc7 is a possible improvement in Spark-Hiarcs, oh look another 50 move Rybka v Rybka game from book ..

[Event "Ðåéòèíãîâàÿ ïàðòèÿ, 3m + 0s"]
[Site "Engine Room"]
[Date "2009.11.28"]
[Round "?"]
[White "HelpMeNow, Rybka 3 DynamicXXX"]
[Black "ÑåðãåéÊîæåâíèêîâ, Rybka 3"]
[Result "0-1"]
[WhiteElo "2588"]
[BlackElo "2588"]
[PlyCount "304"]
[EventDate "2009.12.27"]

{Rybka 3 DynamicXXX: 17.5 ply; 192kN/s Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Quad CPU Q6600 @ 2.
40GHz 2944MHz, (4 threads), MyBook18.3.ctg, 64 MB} 1. Nf3 {0.00/0 0} c5 {0.00/
0 0} 2. e4 {0.00/0 0} d6 {0.00/0 0} 3. d4 {0.00/0 0} cxd4 {0.00/0 0} 4. Nxd4 {
0.00/0 0} Nf6 {0.00/0 0} 5. Nc3 {0.00/0 0} a6 {0.00/0 0} 6. Be3 {0.00/0 0} e5 {
0.00/0 0} 7. Nb3 {0.00/0 0} Be6 {0.00/0 0} 8. f3 {0.00/0 0} h5 {0.00/0 0} 9.
Qd2 {0.00/0 0} Nbd7 {0.00/0 0} 10. Nd5 {0.00/0 0} Bxd5 {0.00/0 0} 11. exd5 {0.
00/0 0} g6 {0.00/0 0} 12. Be2 {0.00/0 0} Bg7 {0.00/0 0} 13. O-O-O {0.00/0 0}
Qc7 {0.00/0 0} 14. Kb1 {0.00/0 0} O-O {0.00/0 0} 15. g4 {0.00/0 0} Rfc8 {0.00/
0 0} 16. Rc1 {0.00/0 0} a5 {0.00/0 0} 17. g5 {0.00/0 0} Ne8 {0.00/0 0} 18. a4 {
0.00/0 0} Nb6 {0.00/0 0} 19. Bb5 {0.00/0 0} Nc4 {0.00/0 0} 20. Qe2 {0.00/0 0}
Nxe3 {0.00/0 0} 21. Qxe3 {0.00/0 0} Qe7 {0.00/0 0} 22. Nd2 {0.00/0 0} Nc7 {0.
00/0 0} 23. c4 {0.00/0 0} Na6 {0.00/0 0} 24. Ne4 {0.00/0 0} Nc5 {0.00/0 0} 25.
Rce1 {0.00/0 0} Rc7 {0.00/0 0} 26. h4 {0.00/0 0} Rf8 {0.00/0 0} 27. Qd2 {0.00/
0 0} b6 {0.00/0 0} 28. Qe3 {0.00/0 0} Rcc8 {0.00/0 0} 29. Bc6 {0.00/0 0} Rcd8 {
0.00/0 0} 30. Ref1 {0.00/0 0} f5 {0.00/0 0} 31. gxf6 {0.00/0 0} Bxf6 {0.00/0 0}
32. Rfg1 {0.00/0 0} Kh7 {0.00/0 0} 33. Ka2 {0.00/0 0} Qf7 {0.00/0 0} 34. Qd2 {
0.00/0 0} Na6 {0.00/0 0} 35. Rh3 {0.00/0 0} Be7 {0.00/0 0} 36. Bb5 {0.00/0 0}
Nb4+ {0.00/0 0} 37. Kb1 {0.00/0 0} Qf4 {0.00/0 0} 38. Qe2 {0.00/0 0} Rf7 {0.00/
0 0} 39. Qg2 {0.00/0 0} Qf5 {0.00/0 0} 40. Rd1 {0.00/0 0} Rg8 {0.00/0 0} 41.
Rg1 {0.00/0 0} Nd3 {0.00/0 0} 42. Rg3 {0.00/0 0} Rfg7 {0.00/0 0} 43. Qh2 {0.00/
0 0} Nc5 {0.00/0 0} 44. Qh1 {0.00/0 0} Nb3 {0.00/0 0} 45. Ka2 {0.00/0 0} Nd4 {
0.00/0 0} 46. Qg2 {0.00/0 0} Rf8 {0.00/0 0} 47. Bd7 {0.00/0 0} Qf7 {0.00/0 0}
48. Be6 {0.00/0 0} Nxe6 {0.00/0 0} 49. dxe6 {0.00/0 0} Qxe6 {0.00/0 0} 50. b3 {
0.00/0 0} Rf4 {-0.70/14 7} 51. Rd1 {-0.41/14 4} Qf5 {-0.70/15 1} 52. Rh3 {-0.
51/14 2} Rg8 {-0.70/15 3} 53. Rd5 {-0.51/15 1} Rf8 {-0.70/15 4} 54. Rd3 {-0.53/
15 2} Rd8 {-0.70/15 1} 55. Qg3 {-0.49/14 7} Qe6 {-0.70/15 0} 56. Rd5 {-0.50/14
4} Qf7 {-0.70/16 1 (Qc8)} 57. Kb2 {-0.46/15 3} Rf8 {-0.70/16 0 (Qf5)} 58. Rd3 {
-0.46/14 3} Qf5 {-0.70/16 1} 59. Qg2 {-0.50/14 2 (Kc2)} Rd8 {-0.70/14 4 (Kg7)}
60. Qg3 {-0.46/14 4} Qe6 {-0.70/15 1} 61. Rd5 {-0.46/15 3} Kg7 {-0.70/15 1
(Qf7)} 62. Ka2 {-0.50/14 4 (Kc2)} Qf7 {-0.70/13 1 (Qf5)} 63. Kb2 {-0.68/15 11
(Kb1)} Rf8 {-0.70/14 2 (Qf5)} 64. Rd3 {-0.50/15 6} Qf5 {-0.70/16 0 (Qe6)} 65.
Qg2 {-0.50/13 2} Rxh4 {-1.10/14 21 (Rd8)} 66. Rxh4 {-0.86/11 2} Bxh4 {-0.98/14
15} 67. Rxd6 {-0.82/13 0} Bd8 {-1.18/14 17} 68. Qc2 {-0.95/14 0 (Qg1)} Bc7 {-1.
28/13 5 (h4)} 69. Rd1 {-0.95/13 2 (Rd2)} Rd8 {-1.37/12 3 (h4)} 70. Rf1 {-1.11/
11 2} Rd4 {-1.30/13 0 (Rd7)} 71. Qg2 {-1.11/11 2 (Qe2)} Bd6 {-1.38/12 2 (h4)}
72. Qe2 {-1.15/12 2 (Rh1)} Be7 {-1.34/13 2 (h4)} 73. Rg1 {-1.13/13 2} Kh7 {-1.
34/14 0 (h4)} 74. Rg2 {-1.04/12 3 (Rh1)} h4 {-1.33/13 4} 75. Rg4 {-1.04/14 0}
Rd8 {-1.25/13 3 (Kg7)} 76. Qf2 {-1.04/13 3} Kg7 {-1.18/14 0} 77. Qf1 {-1.04/13
1} Rf8 {-1.25/12 1 (Rc8)} 78. Qg2 {-1.26/13 3} Qe6 {-1.65/14 8} 79. Qe2 {-1.48/
14 1 (Qh3)} h3 {-1.65/12 1} 80. Rg3 {-1.48/13 12} Rh8 {-2.00/17 0} 81. Rg1 {-1.
87/14 1 (Qh2)} h2 {-2.05/13 2} 82. Rh1 {-1.87/15 0} Qh3 {-2.05/14 0} 83. Qf2 {
-1.87/15 2 (Ka2)} Rh5 {-2.05/14 1} 84. Qe2 {-1.87/15 0} Bf8 {-2.05/14 1 (Bb4)}
85. Qf2 {-1.87/13 1} Bb4 {-2.05/14 0} 86. Kc2 {-1.87/14 2 (Ka2)} Be7 {-2.05/13
1} 87. Kb2 {-1.87/15 1 (Kb1)} Kf7 {-2.05/14 3 (Rh7)} 88. Qe2 {-1.87/13 1 (Kb1)}
Bb4 {-2.05/13 1 (Rh4)} 89. Qf2 {-1.87/12 1} Bf8 {-2.05/14 0} 90. Qe2 {-1.87/13
2} Be7 {-2.05/16 0} 91. Qf2 {-1.87/15 3} Rh8 {-2.05/15 0 (Rh7)} 92. Kc2 {-1.87/
13 1} Rh4 {-2.05/15 0} 93. Qe2 {-1.87/14 2 (Kb1)} Kg7 {-2.03/11 1 (Rh7)} 94.
Nd2 {-1.73/11 1} Bd6 {-2.03/12 0} 95. Ne4 {-1.87/13 2} Bb4 {-2.00/14 0} 96. Qf2
{-1.87/13 1 (Nd2)} Ba3 {-2.22/12 1 (Be7)} 97. Qe2 {-1.87/12 1} Rh5 {-2.05/14 0}
98. Qf2 {-1.87/13 0} Bb4 {-2.02/13 1 (Kf7)} 99. Kb2 {0.00/9 0} Bf8 {-1.95/12 0
(Rh8)} 100. Kb1 {-1.87/12 1 (Ka2)} Kf7 {-1.93/13 3 (Be7)} 101. Kb2 {-1.87/13 2}
Bb4 {-1.95/14 0} 102. Qe2 {-1.87/12 1 (Ka2)} Qh4 {-1.99/13 2 (Kg7)} 103. Qd3 {
-1.81/12 2} Qf4 {-1.98/14 0} 104. Ka2 {-1.90/12 1 (Qd5+)} Bf8 {-2.05/12 1} 105.
Qd7+ {-1.87/12 0 (Kb2)} Kg8 {-2.05/13 1} 106. Qd5+ {-1.90/14 0 (Qd1)} Kg7 {-2.
05/12 1} 107. Qd1 {-1.90/14 1} Qe3 {-2.18/13 1} 108. Kb2 {-2.06/13 2} Be7 {-2.
75/12 0 (Qd4+)} 109. Kc2 {-2.68/12 4} Rf5 {-3.00/14 0} 110. Qd7 {-2.68/12 0}
Qe2+ {-3.19/13 0} 111. Nd2 {-2.88/13 3} Kf8 {-3.27/14 0} 112. Qd3 {-3.07/13 5}
Qf2 {-3.32/15 0 (Qg2)} 113. Qf1 {-2.96/11 1} Rxf3 {-3.48/14 1} 114. Kb1 {-3.62/
13 2 (Kd1)} Qxf1+ {-3.77/11 1} 115. Nxf1 {-3.78/15 0} Rxb3+ {-3.85/13 1} 116.
Kc2 {-3.66/15 0} Rb4 {-3.89/15 1} 117. Nd2 {-3.82/15 2} Rxa4 {-3.85/14 1} 118.
Rxh2 {-3.82/15 0} Kf7 {-3.85/15 6 (Bb4)} 119. Rh8 {-3.36/10 1 (Rh7+)} Bg5 {-4.
24/12 1} 120. Nf3 {-3.70/13 0} Bf6 {-4.31/13 0} 121. Rh7+ {-3.63/13 0} Ke6 {-4.
51/13 0} 122. Nd2 {-4.04/15 4} Bg5 {-4.80/16 0 (Ra2+)} 123. Nf3 {-3.91/12 1}
Rxc4+ {-4.94/15 0 (Kf5)} 124. Kd3 {-3.95/12 1} Rg4 {-4.94/16 0} 125. Nxg5+ {-4.
11/13 0} Rxg5 {-5.09/17 3} 126. Rb7 {-4.34/16 0} Rg3+ {-5.09/16 4} 127. Ke4 {
-4.45/17 0 (Kc4)} Rg4+ {-5.09/13 1} 128. Kd3 {-4.60/17 0 (Ke3)} Rd4+ {-5.09/14
4} 129. Kc3 {-4.80/17 0 (Ke3)} Rd6 {-5.12/13 1 (Rb4)} 130. Kc2 {-4.93/12 1
(Rg7)} e4 {-5.47/9 0} 131. Rg7 {-4.97/11 0} Ke5 {-5.75/9 0 (Kf6)} 132. Rg8 {-5.
17/10 1 (Re7+)} e3 {-6.23/10 0} 133. Re8+ {-5.44/11 0} Kf4 {-6.22/10 0} 134.
Rf8+ {-5.50/11 0 (Re7)} Ke4 {-6.53/8 0 (Kg3)} 135. Re8+ {-5.78/10 1} Kf3 {-6.
82/10 0} 136. Rf8+ {-5.93/10 0} Ke2 {-6.82/9 0} 137. Rh8 {-6.07/9 0 (Kc3)} Rc6+
{-7.22/8 0 (g5)} 138. Kb2 {-6.28/9 1 (Kb3)} Ke1 {-7.64/8 1 (g5)} 139. Rh1+ {-6.
61/8 1} Kd2 {-10.12/11 0} 140. Rh8 {-12.84/10 3 (Rh7)} Rd6 {-10.26/8 1 (g5)}
141. Rh7 {-10.67/8 1 (Rc8)} e2 {-17.59/8 1} 142. Rh1 {-16.23/9 1 (Rh2)} e1=Q {
-18.59/7 1 (g5)} 143. Rxe1 {-16.25/7 0} Kxe1 {-18.48/7 0} 144. Kc2 {-16.75/7 1
(Kc3)} g5 {-18.60/6 0} 145. Kc3 {-#7/9 1} g4 {-#4/9 0} 146. Kc4 {-#6/8 0 (Kb3)}
g3 {-#4/6 0} 147. Kb5 {-#4/7 0 (Kc3)} g2 {-#3/5 0} 148. Ka4 {-#4/4 0} g1=Q {
-#2/3 0} 149. Kb3 {-#2/3 0 (Kb5)} Qc5 {-#2/3 0 (b5)} 150. Kb2 {-#2/3 0} Rd2+ {
-#1/3 0} 151. Kb1 {-#1/3 0} Qc2+ {-#1/3 0} 152. Ka1 {-#1/3 0} Qd1# {#0/3 0} 0-1

[garybelton]

That's like saying it was funny for the WCCC to make a hardware limit and not a book limit. Did you see David Levy laughing?

[jdart]

SCCT and the like have a function, which is trying to match engines with identical playing conditions to determine an overall ranking.

CCT and similar tournaments don't take this approach but are competitive events where engines are allowed to have different hardware and books. You can not like this, but all the major computer tournaments have been like this, for decades.

I think there's a place for both kinds of events but I'm opposed to turning CCT into something like the offline tournaments. As an author, there's no point showing up for an event like that - it would just like the offline ranking matches that enthusiasts run continuously all year. Nothing special at all.

[garybelton]

Good points but there are two key differences, those offline events like CCRL have equal (sometimes approximated) hardware and equal books. I am proposing unequal books (but limited) and unequal hardware. If we don't do something like this the crazy long equal book lines between the "commercial" competitors will only get worse.

[jdart]

I am also opposed to limited books. Opening preparation is part of chess - as much so in top-level human competition as for programs. And chess engines are not just executable programs but also everything that supports it, including books and TBs.

[garybelton]

So you see nothing wrong in the game between Sjeng-Hiarcs then? If so we really have differing opinions on this, but that is ok.

[IanO]

I personally don't see anything wrong with full results out of book. It happens in GM tournaments all the time. That said, a rule which requires a unique book per entrant should go a long ways towards preventing these kinds of results in the future. Such a rule goes hand in hand with the anti-cloning rules. (In fact, would it be possible for Vas to slam down the copyright hammer and declare this tournament null-and-void, because folks were using lines out of the copyrighted Rybka book without authorization?)

As a spectator, it is disappointing. But tournaments are for the players, not the spectators. What this points out is that the tedious meta-game of prepping books for particular opponents is just as important for computer tournaments as it is for GM tournaments, and apparently it is still an open problem. It makes the book-learning work done by LearningLemming and others more interesting.

Ian

[benkidwell]

I understand that viewpoints can differ, and I believe there is certainly a place for all types of competitions - but to me, the ideal of computer chess is that the logic of the program controls and guides the game as much as possible, and a major part of the art of programming a great engine is giving it the positional and strategic understanding of the game needed to play well in the opening without a book.

I believe the analogy between humans and computers as to the role of the opening book is also false; a human always retains their free will as to which book line to follow and when and where to leave their book preparation. In the case of standard UCI + GUI, the engine algorithms are not even running during the "in book" section. The continuing evolution of computer chess going forward seems to need a split between the development of analytical theory and deep analysis from the opening through the midgame, and the development of programs with the ability to synthesize "deep knowledge" of the game on the fly with positional evaluation and no book.

This is my first post to this forum and my opinion is approximately worthless, just sharing the perspective of a long-time chess and computer hobbyist.