dangi12012 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:12 pm
You add a lot of value if your engine is written differently or has new approaches. If its an optimized clone there is no value in releasing.
Differently than what??? If you mean differently than SF and clones, it is, my engine already existed many years before SF first saw the light.
I started with computer chess back in 1977, one of the reasons that I'm not very interested in it anymore.
I mean is there some good idea implemented in it that is not described in the in one form or another in the wiki - and which you didnt publish and apperently take to the grave?
IMO Chess programming is just beginning in a sense that hardware improvements started to accelerate again after 20 years or so. If you bought the top end pc in 1998 it was totally obsolete by 2001. If you bought the top end pc in 2011 it was obsolete by 2018-19.
Now it feels like a huge progress again seeing how fast CUDA and CPUs have become. With the side effect of tensor cores which for now are not used by any engine.
dangi12012 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 19, 2021 3:12 pm
You add a lot of value if your engine is written differently or has new approaches. If its an optimized clone there is no value in releasing.
Differently than what??? If you mean differently than SF and clones, it is, my engine already existed many years before SF first saw the light.
I started with computer chess back in 1977, one of the reasons that I'm not very interested in it anymore.
I mean is there some good idea implemented in it that is not described in the in one form or another in the wiki - and which you didnt publish and apperently take to the grave?
IMO Chess programming is just beginning in a sense that hardware improvements started to accelerate again after 20 years or so. If you bought the top end pc in 1998 it was totally obsolete by 2001. If you bought the top end pc in 2011 it was obsolete by 2018-19.
Now it feels like a huge progress again seeing how fast CUDA and CPUs have become. With the side effect of tensor cores which for now are not used by any engine.
I don't think there is anything in the engine that is worth publishing, all the techniques that it is using are known for years. Maybe some things are implemented a bit differently, but in the end it all boils down to the same.
Every 3 years or so I replace my hardware, currently I have an Intel 10980XE with RTX-2060S and an AMD TR3070X with RTX-3090. The next thing I would like to experiment with is Intel AMX, this will arrive next year in Intel Sapphire Rapids.
The biggest problem with machine learning is that it takes massive amounts of power, right now I'm busy getting my roof stacked up with solar-panels to ease the pain a bit. When this is ready I will take another look at the engine.
Here is the Checkers version of Geri's Checker Game at the end he wanted to get his prize of winning chess pieces Ha Ha Ha
I prefer this instead of your smiley faces, if I reach over 80 years old, I will set up a table on Central Park New York and play by myself, I will become the famous lonely player ==>
They will even make a cartoon out of me ==>
Well I will be just another old man playing by myself ==>
Chessqueen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:18 pm Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>
Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.
Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”
Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Jost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.
It all depends on what type of checkers you are playing some checkers board are 12x12, therefore, the complexity when comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is NOT 64:50 . See it for yourself
Chessqueen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:18 pm Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>
Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.
Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”
Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Joost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.
You need to be educated or informed before you talk, It all depends on what type of checkers you are playing some checkers board are 12x12 played in Canada and the Dominican Republic, therefore, the complexity when comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is NOT 64:50 , it is more like 64:72 The Canadian and Dominican Checkers played on 12x12 with 144 squares which has 72 playable dark squares is much more complicated strategically and tactically and interesting than the 8x8 checkers that Chinook computer solved programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer and his team. I am not going to post anything else on this subject because there are lots of people that immediately jump and try to say something without first investigating. See it for yourself and
Chessqueen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:18 pm Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>
Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.
Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”
Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Joost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.
You need to be educated or informed before you talk, It all depends on what type of checkers you are playing some checkers board are 12x12 played in Canada and the Dominican Republic, therefore, the complexity when comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is NOT 64:50 , it is more like 64:72 The Canadian and Dominican Checkers played on 12x12 with 144 squares which has 72 playable dark squares is much more complicated strategically and tactically and interesting than the 8x8 checkers that Chinook computer solved programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer and his team. I am not going to post anything else on this subject because there are lots of people that immediately jump and try to say something without first investigating. See it for yourself and
You are still trolling in a ridiculous way. Really, you are coming back 5/6 days later and find this and that excuses, which make you look even more goofy.
The whole thread was about 8*8 checkers vs. International draughts, which is 10*10 started by yourself and everyone can see this and everyone replied to this. Even the above quote of yourself still quotes Euwe about a 100 square board lol).
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ?
Post by Chessqueen » Mon Nov 15, 2021 8:31 pm
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts.
Suddently changing the subject now to more exotic seldom variants several days later will not cure your nonsense.
Something is very wrong with you, as you cannot accept what you are...
dangi12012 wrote: ↑Mon Nov 22, 2021 1:10 pm
Can we say that:
8x8 Draughts can be solved. It has been solved programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer and his team with Chinook
10x10 Draughts may be solvable with a tablebase, probably in the next couple of years
But in both cases the playerbase is 100x smaller than chess and thus its less interesting. Only because it is not popular in China and India that has half of the world population, but it is very interesting if you learn how to play it
Note: It is very interesting if you learn how to play it and learn strategies and tactics on youtube, specially if a chess player does NOT make any progress after playing for 3 decades and still can not pass 2100 elo in Chess
Chessqueen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:18 pm Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>
Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.
Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”
Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Joost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.
You need to be educated or informed before you talk, It all depends on what type of checkers you are playing some checkers board are 12x12 played in Canada and the Dominican Republic, therefore, the complexity when comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is NOT 64:50 , it is more like 64:72 The Canadian and Dominican Checkers played on 12x12 with 144 squares which has 72 playable dark squares is much more complicated strategically and tactically and interesting than the 8x8 checkers that Chinook computer solved programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer and his team. I am not going to post anything else on this subject because there are lots of people that immediately jump and try to say something without first investigating. See it for yourself and
You are still trolling in a ridiculous way. Really, you are coming back 5/6 days later and find this and that excuses, which make you look even more goofy.
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ?
Post by Chessqueen » Mon Nov 15, 2021 8:31 pm
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts.
The whole thread was about 8*8 checkers vs. International draughts, which is 10*10 started by yourself and everyone can see this and everyone replied to this. Even the above quote of yourself still quotes Euwe about a 100 square board lol).
Suddenly changing the subject now to more exotic seldom variants several days later will not cure your nonsense.
It does NOT matter if it has passed 5 or 6 days, even 5 or 6 months, I let it go for that long to see if somebody caught the ridiculous statement that you posted here " Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background." Really not all checkers/draughts and similar variants games
Note: That is why I changed it from 10x10 international Draughts and included the Canadian and Dominican Republic 12x12 Draughts with 144 squares in which only 72 Dark Squares are used, because you included all checkers/draughts and similar variants games
Chessqueen wrote: ↑Tue Nov 16, 2021 5:18 pm Honestly I do not know from where you get that Draughts is played on a 50 square board ? Simply count the square here on this game played by GM Ivanchuck after playing Draughts for 8 years is only ranked 1089 in the World = Expert level, Whereas, Ivanchuk reached IM after studying chess for 8 years ==>
Irving Chernev, a chess grandmaster, had the opposite opinion. In 1982 he wrote a book about his first love - checkers, The Complete Encyclopedia of Checkers. In it he stated that he did not think he could accomplish the status of a grandmaster with checkers, as he’d thought he could with chess.
Dr. Max Euwe once had a conversation in New York with a world checkers champion Dr. Marion Tinsley. That's checkers on a checkerboard - a slightly simpler form of our international draughts game (on a 100-square board). He confided in me: "If I want a quiet game with not too much effort, I will play chess. With checkers I must already be very careful at the third or fourth move that I do not do anything wrong, I have to calculate deeply, because one mistake can have fatal consequences. However, when I play chess, I can get away with making a less good move in the opening. I can correct the disadvantage later.”
Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background.
So when talking about complexity and comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is 64:50 and not 64:100 of course.
Joost has told this already two or three times to you in this 'thread', which is for unknown reason in the programmers forum.
You need to be educated or informed before you talk, It all depends on what type of checkers you are playing some checkers board are 12x12 played in Canada and the Dominican Republic, therefore, the complexity when comparing (real) squares between chess and draughts it is NOT 64:50 , it is more like 64:72 The Canadian and Dominican Checkers played on 12x12 with 144 squares which has 72 playable dark squares is much more complicated strategically and tactically and interesting than the 8x8 checkers that Chinook computer solved programmed by Jonathan Schaeffer and his team. I am not going to post anything else on this subject because there are lots of people that immediately jump and try to say something without first investigating. See it for yourself and
You are still trolling in a ridiculous way. Really, you are coming back 5/6 days later and find this and that excuses, which make you look even more goofy.
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ?
Post by Chessqueen » Mon Nov 15, 2021 8:31 pm
Draughts has not been solved, can a chess programmer solve it ? Only 8x8 checkers has been solved by Chinook, but not this version of international Draughts, which could be as complicated as chess with 10x10 Draughts board. I believe that this will be the next challenge to solve Draughts.
The whole thread was about 8*8 checkers vs. International draughts, which is 10*10 started by yourself and everyone can see this and everyone replied to this. Even the above quote of yourself still quotes Euwe about a 100 square board lol).
Suddenly changing the subject now to more exotic seldom variants several days later will not cure your nonsense.
It does NOT matter if it has passed 5 or 6 days, even 5 or 6 months, I let it go for that long to see if somebody caught the ridiculous statement that you posted here " Ouch, you know that half of the squares are unused in all checker/draughts and similar variants games, the rest is just background." Really not all checkers/draughts and similar variants games
Note: That is why I changed it from 10x10 international Draughts and included the Canadian and Dominican Republic 12x12 Draughts with 144 squares in which only 72 Dark Squares are used, because you included all checkers/draughts and similar variants games
Please do not watch this video, since the 8x8 checkers board is set up incorrectly, the White square should always be on the bottom right corner NOT the Black square==>
Learn to play the 8x8 checkers from this video instead ==>
Or the 10x10 international Draughts from this video ===>
Part 2 of the 10x10 international Draughts from this video
