https://www.schach-welt.de/schach/compu ... stalba-eng
I read today the old interview I did with the Stockfish programmers 13 1/2 years ago.
Question 13 and the answer of the programmers is the most interesting for me.
A very long time Stockfish is on rank 1 now.
Only one year or 1 1/2 years Houdini on rank 1, but the differences to Stockfish and Komodo (Doch, today Dragon by Komodo) are not very big at this time.
Maybe others like to read that!
And if you like ...
Don Daily as next (I missed him a lot).
https://www.schach-welt.de/schach/compu ... don-dailey
Best
Frank
12 years later ... the Stockfish interview and Don Daily as next!
Moderator: Ras
-
Frank Quisinsky
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:16 pm
- Location: Gutweiler, Germany
- Full name: Frank Quisinsky
-
mclane
- Posts: 18911
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 6:40 pm
- Location: US of Europe, germany
- Full name: Thorsten Czub
Re: 12 years later ... the Stockfish interview and Don Daily as next!
don was a good guy.
i miss him.
his engine DOCH was very cool.
i miss him.
his engine DOCH was very cool.
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
-
Graham Banks
- Posts: 44636
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
-
Frank Quisinsky
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:16 pm
- Location: Gutweiler, Germany
- Full name: Frank Quisinsky
Re: 12 years later ... the Stockfish interview and Don Daily as next!
Hi Graham,
yes, I know the thread ... the threads I have in my computerchess database (I have collected interesting threads since about 1996) from my own big fora in the past, the fora I am admin and TalkChess. So I can search for this and that in my own database, I can't keep all the information in my brain with the years.
A lot of very strong programmes from the younger generation.
Thinking about the year 2000 / 2001.
James Robertson (USA) with his 15 or 16 years ... on the level of Crafty with a lot of very own ideas. It was a nice dinner in Leiden with him and his father. Both talked about hobbies and during the tournament James Robertson had a long conversation with Franz Morsch (Quest, Fritz) about chess programming and interesting ideas. James was as talented as Tord Romstad or Fabien and all this at the age of 15.
We all had the opinion ... a talent of the century and very rarely in computer chess that such a young programmer is on such a level. James got a very interesting job and, according to my information, gave up chess programming a short time later.
Today ... it seems that 20 such talents are in the TOP-75.
In maybe 2-3 years ... 60!
In maybe 3-4 years we will have 100 engines, the difference is no more than 100 Elo to Stockfish.
Not easy to hold an overview!
Best regards
Frank
PS: James Robertson and Tord Romstad ...
James like his piano and Bach a lot ... same for Tord Romstad after older information I remember.
yes, I know the thread ... the threads I have in my computerchess database (I have collected interesting threads since about 1996) from my own big fora in the past, the fora I am admin and TalkChess. So I can search for this and that in my own database, I can't keep all the information in my brain with the years.
A lot of very strong programmes from the younger generation.
Thinking about the year 2000 / 2001.
James Robertson (USA) with his 15 or 16 years ... on the level of Crafty with a lot of very own ideas. It was a nice dinner in Leiden with him and his father. Both talked about hobbies and during the tournament James Robertson had a long conversation with Franz Morsch (Quest, Fritz) about chess programming and interesting ideas. James was as talented as Tord Romstad or Fabien and all this at the age of 15.
We all had the opinion ... a talent of the century and very rarely in computer chess that such a young programmer is on such a level. James got a very interesting job and, according to my information, gave up chess programming a short time later.
Today ... it seems that 20 such talents are in the TOP-75.
In maybe 2-3 years ... 60!
In maybe 3-4 years we will have 100 engines, the difference is no more than 100 Elo to Stockfish.
Not easy to hold an overview!
Best regards
Frank
PS: James Robertson and Tord Romstad ...
James like his piano and Bach a lot ... same for Tord Romstad after older information I remember.
-
Frank Quisinsky
- Posts: 7053
- Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 7:16 pm
- Location: Gutweiler, Germany
- Full name: Frank Quisinsky
Re: 12 years later ... the Stockfish interview and Don Daily as next!
Hi Graham,
but most interesting is ... who of them can beat Stockfish.
Or we have 100 or 150 programs, the differences to Stockfish = less than 100 Elo but no program is 0,1 Elo stronger.
For the moment we can make stats for looking in differences and can see a lot.
All these years I have the same opinion!
The playing strength is not important anymore, because the engines are about 200 Elo stronger than humans. The time is over for many years. Not for the competitions among a smaller group of people / most are programmers. In the years 2000 I think around 10.000 computer chess people around the World had a bigger interest on it. I hear that most of times from people have today not many interest on computer chess. Have a look how big is the comunity for chess computer lovers today and compare it to people where like chess engines.
Much more interesting as playing strength is:
- bugfree
- nice UCI features
- and the engines should produced an own face, strenghts and weaknesses
The once problem is ...
The stronger the engines, the more complicated fo find out a bit about strengths and weaknesses.
This need a lot of time and of course computing time.
The advantage we have:
All the available engines from the last years. So many nice engines are available for us. Computer chess will be interesting for our life.
That's not the question.
Best
Frank
but most interesting is ... who of them can beat Stockfish.
Or we have 100 or 150 programs, the differences to Stockfish = less than 100 Elo but no program is 0,1 Elo stronger.
For the moment we can make stats for looking in differences and can see a lot.
All these years I have the same opinion!
The playing strength is not important anymore, because the engines are about 200 Elo stronger than humans. The time is over for many years. Not for the competitions among a smaller group of people / most are programmers. In the years 2000 I think around 10.000 computer chess people around the World had a bigger interest on it. I hear that most of times from people have today not many interest on computer chess. Have a look how big is the comunity for chess computer lovers today and compare it to people where like chess engines.
Much more interesting as playing strength is:
- bugfree
- nice UCI features
- and the engines should produced an own face, strenghts and weaknesses
The once problem is ...
The stronger the engines, the more complicated fo find out a bit about strengths and weaknesses.
This need a lot of time and of course computing time.
The advantage we have:
All the available engines from the last years. So many nice engines are available for us. Computer chess will be interesting for our life.
That's not the question.
Best
Frank
-
Bart Weststrate
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2016 3:34 pm
Re: 12 years later ... the Stockfish interview and Don Daily as next!
Very nice work Frank!Frank Quisinsky wrote: ↑Fri Dec 08, 2023 6:50 pm https://www.schach-welt.de/schach/compu ... stalba-eng
I read today the old interview I did with the Stockfish programmers 13 1/2 years ago.
Question 13 and the answer of the programmers is the most interesting for me.