What you could read in Rybka 3 FAQ by Vas

[bob]

Or could it be that he is simply trying to justify something where he got caught red-handed and now has to try to explain his way out of a box that is tightly sealed on all sides???

[bob]

That still doesn't explain why he divides the node count by 10.

From my point of view as somebody who enjoys playing engines against each other, being able to see the pv is much more interesting.
The node count means nothing to me.

Although we all have our preferences as to what we'd like to see, the bottom line is that the engine authors are free to show whatever they like. There are no industry rules that they must adhere to in that regard.

Does anybody accuse Lance of trying to hide something because he chooses not to display Thinker's PV? There are of course a few other engines that don't produce this information also.

There's an interesting thread in the Rybka forum that seems to indicate a deal of hypocracy.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=6210

This clone accusation complex seems to be an all consuming affliction for some these days. Disappointing really, because it detracts from the good and useful work that they do produce.

I glanced at the thread, but am not going to read propaganda. But to correct one statement there, I have not been on the "clone bandwagon". I have only been on the "Vas obfuscates numbers to hide internal secrets". And that is essentially a dead subject that has been proven already...

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

That still doesn't explain why he divides the node count by 10.

From my point of view as somebody who enjoys playing engines against each other, being able to see the pv is much more interesting.
The node count means nothing to me.

Although we all have our preferences as to what we'd like to see, the bottom line is that the engine authors are free to show whatever they like. There are no industry rules that they must adhere to in that regard.

Does anybody accuse Lance of trying to hide something because he chooses not to display Thinker's PV? There are of course a few other engines that don't produce this information also.

There's an interesting thread in the Rybka forum that seems to indicate a deal of hypocracy.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=6210

This clone accusation complex seems to be an all consuming affliction for some these days. Disappointing really, because it detracts from the good and useful work that they do produce.

I glanced at the thread, but am not going to read propaganda. But to correct one statement there, I have not been on the "clone bandwagon". I have only been on the "Vas obfuscates numbers to hide internal secrets". And that is essentially a dead subject that has been proven already...

To be honest enough,Robert discussed and is discussing the Kn/s issue almost from a professional point of view without involving himself into hidden personal attacks like you know who....

[Rolf]

That still doesn't explain why he divides the node count by 10.

From my point of view as somebody who enjoys playing engines against each other, being able to see the pv is much more interesting.
The node count means nothing to me.

Although we all have our preferences as to what we'd like to see, the bottom line is that the engine authors are free to show whatever they like. There are no industry rules that they must adhere to in that regard.

Does anybody accuse Lance of trying to hide something because he chooses not to display Thinker's PV? There are of course a few other engines that don't produce this information also.

There's an interesting thread in the Rybka forum that seems to indicate a deal of hypocracy.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=6210

This clone accusation complex seems to be an all consuming affliction for some these days. Disappointing really, because it detracts from the good and useful work that they do produce.

I glanced at the thread, but am not going to read propaganda. But to correct one statement there, I have not been on the "clone bandwagon". I have only been on the "Vas obfuscates numbers to hide internal secrets". And that is essentially a dead subject that has been proven already...

Bob, besides Vas, all other do it differently without hiding anything at all?

[bob]

That still doesn't explain why he divides the node count by 10.

From my point of view as somebody who enjoys playing engines against each other, being able to see the pv is much more interesting.
The node count means nothing to me.

Although we all have our preferences as to what we'd like to see, the bottom line is that the engine authors are free to show whatever they like. There are no industry rules that they must adhere to in that regard.

Does anybody accuse Lance of trying to hide something because he chooses not to display Thinker's PV? There are of course a few other engines that don't produce this information also.

There's an interesting thread in the Rybka forum that seems to indicate a deal of hypocracy.
http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... l?tid=6210

This clone accusation complex seems to be an all consuming affliction for some these days. Disappointing really, because it detracts from the good and useful work that they do produce.

I glanced at the thread, but am not going to read propaganda. But to correct one statement there, I have not been on the "clone bandwagon". I have only been on the "Vas obfuscates numbers to hide internal secrets". And that is essentially a dead subject that has been proven already...

Bob, besides Vas, all other do it differently without hiding anything at all?

You are missing the point.

(1) there is a small amount of wiggle-room in counting nodes. Do you count illegal moves or just legal ones? But that is it. And that is a tiny percentage in a normal chess game. My NPS varies enough as it is, from one position to another, due to SMP issues and the like. But nodes are nodes. And there is one correct approach.

(2) nobody intentionally divides their node counts by some constant or random number, nobody intentionally alters their reported search depths. Nobody intentionally alters the PV to show less information. Etc.

So "all others" are not doing it differently in this context. We may have some slight variances, but nodes are nodes are nodes, except with Rybka, where nodes are something else entirely. If they are not "nodes" then just don't call 'em nodes. Call 'em "clusters". Or "clumps", or "fuzzy positions" or something that does not have a well-defined and accepted definition...

How complicated can that be to understand?

[Rolf]

Bob, besides Vas, all other do it differently without hiding anything at all?

You are missing the point.

(1) there is a small amount of wiggle-room in counting nodes. Do you count illegal moves or just legal ones? But that is it. And that is a tiny percentage in a normal chess game. My NPS varies enough as it is, from one position to another, due to SMP issues and the like. But nodes are nodes. And there is one correct approach.

(2) nobody intentionally divides their node counts by some constant or random number, nobody intentionally alters their reported search depths. Nobody intentionally alters the PV to show less information. Etc.

So "all others" are not doing it differently in this context. We may have some slight variances, but nodes are nodes are nodes, except with Rybka, where nodes are something else entirely. If they are not "nodes" then just don't call 'em nodes. Call 'em "clusters". Or "clumps", or "fuzzy positions" or something that does not have a well-defined and accepted definition...

How complicated can that be to understand?

45 minutes ago someone wrote this here, Bob. It's my last argument against what you have written now:

QUOTE

Some people don't understand why Junior is skipping plies and jumps from 9 to 12 to 15 and so forth.
Some people don't understand why Hiarcs is stronger than Glaurung, although Glaurung searches 3 times more kn/s.
Some people don't understand why Zappa shows a node count that is 3 times lower than Deep Fritz and still beats Fritz.
Some people don't understand why Deep Blue played horrible positional moves searching 1 billion moves per second.

I don't care about these stupid things. Chess is playing strong moves and outwit your opponent. For me Junior can jump from ply 3 to 14 and 35, if it plays great chess there is not one hair on my head complaining about this behaviour.

QUOTE END

Bob, to me this sounds as if all are doing something very differently to others but it all is irrelevant if the chess is well enough.

After you answered me I will publish the writer of the above, Bob.

[bob]

Bob, besides Vas, all other do it differently without hiding anything at all?

You are missing the point.

(1) there is a small amount of wiggle-room in counting nodes. Do you count illegal moves or just legal ones? But that is it. And that is a tiny percentage in a normal chess game. My NPS varies enough as it is, from one position to another, due to SMP issues and the like. But nodes are nodes. And there is one correct approach.

(2) nobody intentionally divides their node counts by some constant or random number, nobody intentionally alters their reported search depths. Nobody intentionally alters the PV to show less information. Etc.

So "all others" are not doing it differently in this context. We may have some slight variances, but nodes are nodes are nodes, except with Rybka, where nodes are something else entirely. If they are not "nodes" then just don't call 'em nodes. Call 'em "clusters". Or "clumps", or "fuzzy positions" or something that does not have a well-defined and accepted definition...

How complicated can that be to understand?

45 minutes ago someone wrote this here, Bob. It's my last argument against what you have written now:

QUOTE

Some people don't understand why Junior is skipping plies and jumps from 9 to 12 to 15 and so forth.

So? There are _lots_ of things "some people" don't understand. Amir explained how he does "plies" years ago. And he uses a different definition, but at least he explained it. He though it reasonable that instead of reducing by one ply for normal moves, and less than a ply for captures (because of the recapture extension idea) that he would just reduce by 2 plies for normal moves, and 1 ply for captures, which is another way to implement a recapture extension. how far he carried it beyond that I don't know. I never had any problem translating from his "depth" to mine, in that regard. But notice that he _did_ explain what he was doing. Vas never chose to admit what he had done, even after many had directly challenged his numbers. That is a difference.

[quote
Some people don't understand why Hiarcs is stronger than Glaurung, although Glaurung searches 3 times more kn/s.

Not sure what to say. There is intelligence, which translates to low NPS values, and there is fast tactical searching, which translates to high NPS values. We've always known that excelling in one of those two is not enough to overcome the other in all cases... Nothing new there.

Some people don't understand why Zappa shows a node count that is 3 times lower than Deep Fritz and still beats Fritz.

So? Crafty seems to be one of the fastest programs around, yet it doesn't beat those programs either. Just because your engine can turn 10,000 RPM doesn't mean you are going to win the race...

Some people don't understand why Deep Blue played horrible positional moves searching 1 billion moves per second.

Some people will never accept the DB beat Kasparov or that Neil Armstrong walked on the moon, either. DB didn't play "horrible positional moves". "Ugly" from time to time, yes. And so do todays top-of-the-heap engines, as far as that goes...

I don't care about these stupid things. Chess is playing strong moves and outwit your opponent. For me Junior can jump from ply 3 to 14 and 35, if it plays great chess there is not one hair on my head complaining about this behaviour.

QUOTE END

Bob, to me this sounds as if all are doing something very differently to others but it all is irrelevant if the chess is well enough.

After you answered me I will publish the writer of the above, Bob.

The issue that was first raised was "what was the intent? what was the reason for obfuscation?" Ban didn't try to obfuscate his depth. He used a different approach which seems to be perfectly logical. I personally don't like it because once again, we have a slightly different version of ply. For most of us, ply is 1 level in the tree. In junior it is two levels in the tree. But at least we know. In the Rybka case, the obfuscation was never explained, although to those of us familiar with engines, the reason was clear enough.

[Rolf]

What you just delt with, Bob, was taken from the newest message Jeroen had written. I am happy that you treated his thoughts with respect. Thanks for that.

I can only say that I wonder if you really could say that someone like Vas did that because a concrete goal and that this goal is visible for true experts like you or Chris. All you can say IMO that he doesnt give usual output. But you cant pretend that he must have some wrong or unallowed in mind and that he exactly veils this by the displayed numbers. Why dont you just translate the wrong numbers into what you think is better??

[Tony Thomas]

bla bla bla...

It seems to me that you dont even understand the point of the argument.

My God, Tony, you should know better than starting an argument with HIM!

Ernest, I guess you havent seen me doing street racing. I drive a 25th anniversary edition Camaro with a custom tag (too slow). Most of the time kids driving their wittle Honda civics pull up next to me and rev up their engines. I usually ignore them, sometimes I get annoyed by their crappy exhaust that makes too much noise and slightly rev up my car..Usually the low toned growl is enough to put them to shame, and they take of as soon as the light turns green. Me on the other hand drives normally and gets 24 MPG on a Camaro.

Just stirring up the beef stew regards
Tony

[Rolf]

Or could it be that he is simply trying to justify something where he got caught red-handed and now has to try to explain his way out of a box that is tightly sealed on all sides???

Ouch!

Bob and Christophe!

Take me just as a friend or a reporter, because I didnt say this, I didnt cause it to be said and I wont repeat it to making you angry. But if I had seen someone making des blagues about you you really should make a couple of clarifications.

The point is that an expert from outer space/CCC says with a smile:

Rybka is very similar to fruit, at least in its origin.

It uses a different knowledge representation (bitboards), according to CT.

It uses a far more sophisticated search than other programs, according to Hyatt.

More, Rybka uses also Larry's evaluation research, so that we get the following very logical argument, Bob, and everybody is laughing now about the two fairy tellers from CCC. Here is what he says about this new logical argument, if we take everything together:

Rybka IS fruit, only with a different search, different evaluation, and different knowledge representation!

And he continues his laughter! He said to me he will continue his ROTFL as long as I dont come back and tell him what you truly think about the mess. <cough>


The worst is to me that all what he said sounds logical for me. So, who could I believe? CT never. You was always state of the art for me. But now someone sees you in an absolute wrong. And I cant tolerate that. I feel unwell and before I swing I want to hear what you had to explain as another expert. In short, did you exaggerate a bit? In your support of CT?

If yes, couldnt you correct this allegation to the blood-red hands? Peace!