Maybe you should try single-core next year

[gerold]

I also think the Baron (quad) and Joker (duo) might have done better if they had better hardware, as we all know anything can happen.

Indeed, assuming The Baron could use 8 cores, The Operon 270 is probably half the speed of the W5580 per core, so maybe would have searched 3 times faster on 8 Cores on the W5580 compared to 4 cores on the Opteron (minimum)

Actually, Joker was only using a single core. It was running on a 2.33GHz Core 2 Quad made available by the organizers. The mentioned Core 2 Duo was misinformation given by me when I registered, under the assumption that I would have to bring my own machine. Sorry about that.

The Quad was convenient, though, as I could play the Chinese Chess games on the same machine using another core, and could even test the pondering modification I made to that (using 2 cores) while I was playing Chess.

Thanks for endering. Joker's games were interesting.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Congratulations. 3/3. Crippled, Blitz, Unlimited. The pathetic decision proved.. Meaningless. Nice try tough. Maybe it's time to go back to the drawing board? You know, focus more on engine development instead of trying to cripple out your nemesis. It's called sportsmanship, right? more fun for everyone, trust me.

In the end, what did this little experiment prove? That you can limit a Bugatti to use only 8 of it's 16 cylinders, It's still gonna be a $hitload better than a HYUNDAIRCS.

GJ.

I think this is a bit too harsh on Harvey's side....
I don't like either the hardware limitation stupidity,but this doesn't mean to jump all over the guy and harsh him like that....
Dr.D

[pijl]

Looking at a rating list and watching a event live are two different things. I also think the Baron (quad) and Joker (duo) might have done better if they had better hardware, as we all know anything can happen.

The Baron was running on a Core2 - Quad 2.33Ghz, provided by the organisation. I had a little bit of trouble crippling Vista (in doing nothing more than being an operating system) as it was the Spanish version. It could in principle have run on 8 cores (I already tested that a few times some time ago, the speedup seemed to be decent) but I did not want it to play on remote hardware. I might do that in the future though.
Richard.

[Nid Hogge]

Congratulations. 3/3. Crippled, Blitz, Unlimited. The pathetic decision proved.. Meaningless. Nice try tough. Maybe it's time to go back to the drawing board? You know, focus more on engine development instead of trying to cripple out your nemesis. It's called sportsmanship, right? more fun for everyone, trust me.

In the end, what did this little experiment prove? That you can limit a Bugatti to use only 8 of it's 16 cylinders, It's still gonna be a $hitload better than a HYUNDAIRCS.

GJ.

I think this is a bit too harsh on Harvey's side....
I don't like either the hardware limitation stupidity,but this doesn't mean to jump all over the guy and harsh him like that....
Dr.D

Wasn't the core limit decision already a little harsh by itself?

You know, I'd really wouldn't say any of these things If Harvey would just step forward like a real man and say "Congratulations Guys". But what happens instead? He's being sore. Ugh.

http://rybkaforum.net/cgi-bin/rybkaforu ... ?tid=11021

There comes a point when you need to let go of all the nonsense. Just recognize that you wer'e outplayed and say 'grats guys, see you next year. Gee'z, It's just Computer Chess wer'e dealing with here, Why all the drama? the purpose is to have fun and watch quality chess, not delve into these semantic issues and the boring aftermath.

Analyze your games, study what went wront, try to improve, come back next year. Simple.

I don't have any problem with Harvey. I've got problem with the way. The way things are being layed out. It's about basic respect, nothing complicated. I understand the frustration about Rybka dominance. But really, just move on and stop being fretful. Come up with better ways to compete, instead of turning back time and blocking innovation.

Aye?

[Nid Hogge]

Yes, 5th was not a good result for Hiarcs on equal hardware. I guess some will say that is justice. But with so few games, anything can and does happen in these tournaments

Having two tournaments - one open and one with a hardware limit - is a good idea in theory, but I think they got it horribly wrong.

In the hardware limited section, we had everything from a Core 2 duo up to the W5580 boxes, a huge differential. So, was it that different from the open tournament ? No it wasn't. If the aim was to not have the huge hardware differential it failed. And the W5580 boxes would have been £4,000 - £5,000 each (upwards of $US 6,000). So if the aim was to run on affordable hardware for the everyday person, it failed miserably again. A total failure on every count, apart from Rybka's very deserved win.

Bingo on that one, btw. 100% what I think.

[Harvey Williamson]

These kind of posts are really funny. If anyone has any evidence that I did anything other than support the rule change please put up or shut up. I am sorry that you did not personally witness me congratulate the Rybka team. However we had a dinner - Richard, Johan, me and Hans - where Hans drank Champagne - the rest of us preferred a good single malt called Cardhu. I flew home with my friend Hans - I have chatted with Jeroen and exchanged emails with Vas - again sorry if this is not satisfactory to you. The way some guys are crying on the Rybka forum you would think they came 5th.

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

Yes, 5th was not a good result for Hiarcs on equal hardware. I guess some will say that is justice. But with so few games, anything can and does happen in these tournaments

Given that the engines in front of Hiarcs were Rybka, Shredder, Deep Sjeng and Junior, I don't see how it was a bad result, nor why it would have been different with more games. The ratinglists seem to indicate that this is a result to be expected. Being 5th is no shame in such a strong field. It would have been another matter if Rybka were 5th - that would have been unexpected.

Maybe Junior is the odd one out, but the public release is quite old, and Junior always does much better in the WCCC than in the ratinglists.

[Harvey Williamson]

Yes, 5th was not a good result for Hiarcs on equal hardware. I guess some will say that is justice. But with so few games, anything can and does happen in these tournaments

Given that the engines in front of Hiarcs were Rybka, Shredder, Deep Sjeng and Junior, I don't see how it was a bad result, nor why it would have been different with more games. The ratinglists seem to indicate that this is a result to be expected. Being 5th is no shame in such a strong field. It would have been another matter if Rybka were 5th - that would have been unexpected.

Maybe Junior is the odd one out, but the public release is quite old, and Junior always does much better in the WCCC than in the ratinglists.

Agreed the result was obviously fair - and going into round 9 many different results possible - Hiarcs, Shredder and Sjeng could have finished 2nd - Rybka or junior could have won. In the end only half a point between 2nd and 5th.

[Harvey Williamson]

Congratulations. 3/3. Crippled, Blitz, Unlimited. The pathetic decision proved.. Meaningless. Nice try tough. Maybe it's time to go back to the drawing board? You know, focus more on engine development instead of trying to cripple out your nemesis. It's called sportsmanship, right? more fun for everyone, trust me.

In the end, what did this little experiment prove? That you can limit a Bugatti to use only 8 of it's 16 cylinders, It's still gonna be a $hitload better than a HYUNDAIRCS.

GJ.

IMHO it did not prove meaningless - it proved that Rybka was the best. For next year I support a similar rule or uniform hardware.

[Matthias Gemuh]

The way some guys are crying on the Rybka forum you would think they came 5th.

Didn't Hiarcs finish just half a point behind 2nd position ?
That is not what I call 5th.

Matthias.