CCT: New rules for CCT Events #2

[pedrox]

It is unfair not to allow book public and allow to use databases of millions of games managed by a GUI like ChessBase to create a book and use an adapter of company Aquarium.

The engines of second and third division as well as not to have good opening books because usually good book creators are interested in powerful engines, they will be forced to use bad books created by their own programmers. Maybe too much work for a tournament, maybe this will make fewer entries.

Pedro

[Don]

I have given this issue some thought and I believe there should be no restrictions on opening books. I don't think you (as TD) need yet another thing to have to track and monitor and books are as ubiquitous as hardware, endgame databases or GUI's these days.

However, for rating agencies I think it DOES matter but I admit this is subject to opinion and it's not difficult to pose good arguments for and against. I believe rating agencies (or whatever you call them) should be measuring raw engine strength as much as possible. Most consumers of chess programs will want to know how strong their favorite engine is apart from the opening book as they might be used to analyze your own games. I also would prefer not using endgame databases for the same reason.

If chess computing systems are modular, then ending database and opening book are components that can be standardized and "engine" is not. Of course it's also possible to test opening books separately which is done and is a good thing.

Tournaments, in my opinion, should be competitions between "chess playing systems" where some of the elements of a chess playing system is the hardware used, the opening book, ending database and even the GUI. The GUI is not supposed to make a difference but it can if it's buggy, slow, or lacks an important feature needed to support strong overall play. So I support anything goes (or anything you can muster) for chess tournaments except of course the raw chess playing engine itself.

Definitely an improvement Peter. I assume the CCT is not ready to limit books to ECO relative length then?

In my mind, limiting the books equates to limiting the hardware or depth the program is allowed to search.

Books are an integral part of an engine, and the CCT has been and always will be an "Open" event. In that you bring the best hardware, the best version of your engine, and your team's best book. (Book has obviously just been added)

When you start to limit to many things, the event becomes a basement tournament that anyone could run in their spare time. The CCT, in my mind, is the most important computer chess event in any calendar year. (My apologies to Charles who also runs an online event, but CCT is my baby now )

Peter

[michiguel]

It is unfair not to allow book public and allow to use databases of millions of games managed by a GUI like ChessBase to create a book and use an adapter of company Aquarium.

The engines of second and third division as well as not to have good opening books because usually good book creators are interested in powerful engines, they will be forced to use bad books created by their own programmers. Maybe too much work for a tournament, maybe this will make fewer entries.

Pedro

As an author of a non-top engine, I may prefer to face Jeroen Noomen only *once* in a tournament. Mostly, because it is extremely boring also to deal with the same book over and over again. Second, I do not think that having the burden to create your own book is a valid reason to allow multiplication of the same book in a tournament. It is part of the challenge! You can create a decent general automated book that will allow you to compete. For a non-top engine, the book is generally the least of the problems.

Miguel

[garybelton]

Tournaments, in my opinion, should be competitions between "chess playing systems" where some of the elements of a chess playing system is the hardware used, the opening book, ending database and even the GUI

All opinions are valid. The trouble with the unlimited book in my opinion, and I am especially referring to the WCCC is this ..

Let's say Junior (or Shredder or Hiarcs) turn up with a killer book and beat the Rybka cluster or the Sjeng cluster through a book win, they are then crowned World Champions and this goes on their boxes on the sales shelf. Joe Schmoe reads this and think aha "Junior is better than Rybka" I'll buy that.

When in reality if Joe Schmoe had went to CCRL or CEGT he would have found that Rybka is strongest.

The pooint? Joe Schmoe doesn't get the killer book that Junior used to beat Rybka in his purchase.

That's one problem (to my mind). The other is the horrible 50+ move draws which I believe we're going to start seeing a lot more of, if the Playchess server games are anything to go by.

[Harvey Williamson]

Tournaments, in my opinion, should be competitions between "chess playing systems" where some of the elements of a chess playing system is the hardware used, the opening book, ending database and even the GUI

All opinions are valid. The trouble with the unlimited book in my opinion, and I am especially referring to the WCCC is this ..

Let's say Junior (or Shredder or Hiarcs) turn up with a killer book and beat the Rybka cluster or the Sjeng cluster through a book win, they are then crowned World Champions and put this goes on their boxes on the sales shelf. Joe Schmoe reads this and think aha "Junior is better than Rybka" I'll buy that.

When in reality if Joe Schmoe had went to CCRL or CEGT he would have found that Rybka is strongest.

The pooint? Joe Schmoe doesn't get the killer book that Junior used to beat Rybka in his purchase.

That's one problem (to my mind). The other is the horrible 50+ move draws which I believe we're going to start seeing a lot more of, if he Playchess server games are anything to go by.

You can say the same with the hardware. Cluster Sjeng wins CCT12 on 80 cores - who knows if on the machine you have at home, with 1,2,4 or 8 cores, it will be any good. Joe Schmoe is more likely to be given a killer book with his purchase than an 80 core cluster.

[garybelton]

You can say the same with the hardware. Cluster Sjeng wins CCT12 on 80 cores - who knows if on the machine you have at home, with 1,2,4 or 8 cores, it will be any good.

I believe the book is about 1000x more important than the hardware. Just look at some of the Eros Riccio games on Playchess.

[Harvey Williamson]

You can say the same with the hardware. Cluster Sjeng wins CCT12 on 80 cores - who knows if on the machine you have at home, with 1,2,4 or 8 cores, it will be any good.

I believe the book is about 1000x more important than the hardware. Just look at some of the Eros Riccio games on Playchess.

A killer book can be given with the product no one is offering a Cluster. H13 will have a book that will be at least the one we used in CCT - probably more up to date.

[garybelton]

H13 will have a book that will be at least the one we used in CCT - probably more up to date.

Will you sell your actual WCCC book with H13?

[Don]

It is unfair not to allow book public and allow to use databases of millions of games managed by a GUI like ChessBase to create a book and use an adapter of company Aquarium.

The engines of second and third division as well as not to have good opening books because usually good book creators are interested in powerful engines, they will be forced to use bad books created by their own programmers. Maybe too much work for a tournament, maybe this will make fewer entries.

Pedro

As an author of a non-top engine, I may prefer to face Jeroen Noomen only *once* in a tournament. Mostly, because it is extremely boring also to deal with the same book over and over again. Second, I do not think that having the burden to create your own book is a valid reason to allow multiplication of the same book in a tournament. It is part of the challenge! You can create a decent general automated book that will allow you to compete. For a non-top engine, the book is generally the least of the problems.

Miguel

Books have always been a major issue in computer chess. It is recognized that they can make a huge difference in strength. In the CCT12 tournament at least one of our games was over before we were out of book. We have been victims as well as victors many times because of the book - so it's clear that this is an important factor.

It comes down to what the tournament rules are. I do not think there is a clear right or wrong here, just our opinions.

This is a factor in almost every kind of sport/contest. I like tennis myself but in the past there has been controversy over the logistics of it. Are you measuring the talent and skill of the players and to what extent do you try to standardize the equipment? The dimensions and characterstics of the courts, the balls, the rackets all play a part. In golf the top golfers can afford equipment that perhaps gives them a bit of an additional advantage over players like you and I. Of course in Nascar it's a huge issue and there are all kinds of rules but it still comes down to money and not just the skill of the driver (and the teams involved.)

I guess I take the point of view that it's pretty difficult to administer a huge set of rules and regulations about what you can and cannot do so that it's simpler to just say bring whatever you can muster and loosen the restrictions as much as reasonably possible. There is also the argument that if you restrict anything you limit the strength, and most people would like to see the highest quality play possible.

[Harvey Williamson]

H13 will have a book that will be at least the one we used in CCT - probably more up to date.

Will you sell your actual WCCC book with H13?

The Spain one - if you want that instead probably - it is out of date now - the one we used for CCT is much more up to date. It is also incredibly small so you may feel cheated when you receive it - it is not a stand alone book.