new/updated engines

[Olivier Deville]

Unfortunately it appears you could send us a clean program, get our approval, and then enter any clone in any tournament.

Hi Olivier,

As far as I know, there are dozens of engines in your tournaments without source code supplied. Why are you making an exception with Dolphin?

Also, where is a tournament, even the World Championships, where anyone is obliged to provide his source code? No commercial would do so anyway.

Let's suppose innocence first. If it is a clone, we will find out sooner or later.

Hi Gabor

I guess this rule does exist in the World Championships : in case of a suspicion, the ICGA can request the source code of a particular engine.

Here there is suspicion because Anthony uses the ICC account of a known cloner. The story he told us may be true, of course. I don't know.

Spending hours of CPU time for a clone is a real pain. Maybe I am a bit overprotective now, because I received so many clones lately. Two months ago I discarded an engine that was actually not a clone, but whose author gave me a fake identity.

Olivier

[Gábor Szots]

Spending hours of CPU time for a clone is a real pain. Maybe I am a bit overprotective now, because I received so many clones lately.
Olivier

Yes, I know the feeling, I myself have wasted valuable time testing clones. Still, it is also a pain to be forced to follow this way because of the occassional fraud. And now the author has to trust you when you don't trust the author.

Best regards,

[Graham Banks]

CCRL was given Dolphin to test. It seems to be another clone.

[Zach Wegner]

Pfft, I could have told you that.

[antzmatt]

CCRL was given Dolphin to test. It seems to be another clone.

What makes you post this?

I have programmed the engine.

Now that you have said this I demand proof for your this statement,which obviously you can never find,

Or else an public apology.

I offered before,I offer now,to send a copy of the executable to any person who YOU chose to be fit to answer the legit question.

You guys probably just do not want to accept a new engine too bad.

Graham I really need an explanation from you...tell me WHY do you think its a clone,along with subsequent proof, & since you surely can not find any,think more then twice before you post this sort of rubbish.

Enough is enough,you just want to jump the gun,so I am not going to move off,you either shoot me or take the gun off,& DO NOT MAKE wild statements without proof to back it.

& Zach, what do you know about Dolphin or me to make such statements?
You my dear friend are in no position to pass & make such posts.

Now Graham you have posted this,come with proof,Lets end this once & for all...

Zach since you seem so keep on getting into this,i do not mind sending you a copy of the exe,go through it...you will know the truth.

To Gabor, you & Ron Murawski seem to be the only sane person here,everyone else is keen to claim every engine is a clone.

Graham,Zach,Olivier & others of same thinking pattern, please bear in mind the rule is Innocent until proven guilty & not the other way around.

Or lets use the more used phrase,

PUT UP OR SHUT UP.

Sincerely waiting for your response,

Anthony

[Graham Banks]

CCRL was given Dolphin to test. It seems to be another clone.

What makes you post this?

I have programmed the engine.

Now that you have said this I demand proof for your this statement,which obviously you can never find,

Or else an public apology.

I offered before,I offer now,to send a copy of the executable to any person who YOU chose to be fit to answer the legit question.

...............................

Anthony

Hi Anthony,

I'll send the engine to a couple of "experts" outside of CCRL - ones that I trust so that your engine still remains private.
If I'm wrong, you will receive a full apology. In the meantime we'll hold off further testing.

Regards, Graham.

[Olivier Deville]

Hi Anthony

Innocent until proven guilty is a very good rule.

Graham just sent me Dolphin, I'll have a look at it. I have forwarded it to Daniel Mehrmann as well.

I am not at all against new engines. If Dolphin is proven to be clean, I'll ask permission to use it in next ChessWar.

By the way, do you have an own book for Dolphin ? And does it support both winboard and UCI protocols, or only UCI ?

Olivier

[Guenther Simon]

Hi Ron,

Just a quick note. Chaturanga is now at version 2.41.

Regards,
Guenther

[Olivier Deville]

Anthony, btw we found you here :

http://www.forcesreunited.org.uk/namear ... lphin.html



Olivier

[Zach Wegner]

Zach since you seem so keep on getting into this,i do not mind sending you a copy of the exe,go through it...you will know the truth.

Please do.

zwegner@gmail.com

[Charles Browne]

Zach since you seem so keep on getting into this,i do not mind sending you a copy of the exe,go through it...you will know the truth.

Please do.

zwegner@gmail.com

To maybe save someone some pain in trying to send an executable attachment directly to a gmail address, gmail does not allow the receiving or sending of executable files.

A work around that is supposed to still work is to rename the .exe extension to something like .jpg or .txt and then when the person receives the file, the file extension can be renamed back to .exe.

Upload the file to some place like rapidshare or your own hosting site and send the person with the gmail address the download link.

I don't know if it is true but sending an executable in a rar file is supposed to bypass google's security scan.


http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=gm ... tnG=Search


I once tried to send someone with a gmail address an executable file and my e-mails kept getting bounced back to me. The person I was sending the file to didn't know about Google's Gmail executable file policy and I didn't know about it either. So back then I had no idea why my mails were being bounced back.

[F. Bluemers]

Dolphin is not a proven clone,it should be entered into cct2009!
always good to see a NEW engine


Best
Fonzy

Edit: you can register here,anthony:http://sites.google.com/site/cctchess/registration

[antzmatt]

Ok,Olivier this is a step forward & I welcome it.

Dolphin is a UCI only engine atm, but on suggestions i am in the midst of implementing winboard protocol as well.

Dolphin indeed supports own book,which is somewhat inspired from Shredder UCI GUI's book protocol,the concepts are pretty much the same,i.e. a-g values etc.....

Dolphin supports EGTBs,with permission with Eugene Nalimov & Andrew Kadatch.

Supports Shredder UCI GUI version of Chess960.

Since Graham has sent out dolphin to some people,I'd be ok if he or Olivier were to forward it to Zach Wegner,since I do not want Zach to say i sent him something else from what is being investigated.

The exe that was sent to CCRL does not support opening book as it was disabled,by me.

If you want let me know i will send you one that supports the book..

Anthony

[Swaminathan]

Dolphin is not a proven clone,it should be entered into cct2009!
always good to see a NEW engine


Best
Fonzy

Edit: you can register here,anthony:http://sites.google.com/site/cctchess/registration

Hi Fonzy,

Charles Roberson is one of the co-organizer and also the main mover of the CCT 2009 tournament. I just do registration and stuffs out for him. I'm not a Tournament Director for CCT .Ideas are from Charles and I thank him for that.

In Rules and Regulations, among other rules, you can find this one:

Code: Select all

To enter, you need to be an established author.

This means that a program of yours must have a track record in some public environment such as previous official tournaments or main testing sites (CCRL, Open War etc).

Ways to establish yourself as a recognized author is -

*If Private, your engine should have an history of official tournament participation (World champs, ACCA, Previous CCT, Paderborn etc)

* If private, send your engine to the major testing team to get their approval.

else.

* Release of the engine to the public.

All new engine authors undergo this screening test, so It's normal.

So It's upto Anthony to establish himself as an author, else It's unlikely his engine will be allowed to enter.

[Olivier Deville]

Hi Anthony

Yes please send me a version that supports opening book (and the book itself of course).

I am going to send Dolphin to Zach.

Olivier

[antzmatt]

Hi Olivier,

Sure i will send you book enabled exe + the book itself,

But lets get through this investigations that you are doing,Lets finish this,

As soon as you are done with realizing that Dolphin is indeed programmed by me,I will gladly let it take part in your tournaments with its book of course.

Could you keep everyone here in the light by telling how far have you & the team gone with the investigations.

I request you to kindly do this as first priority please,as I need to get a clean flag from you & then get established ratings,which you & CCRL,as required by Charles Roberson & N.Swaminathan for the CCT 2009.

Swami himself had suggested me CCRL ,even before i wrote him the mail with my registration,but here is what I got from Graham.

Please do the needful,& please do it asap.

Thanks,
Anthony

[Graham Banks]

Swami himself had suggested me CCRL ,even before i wrote him the mail with my registration,but here is what I got from Graham.

Please do the needful,& please do it asap.

Thanks,
Anthony

Anthony - I have already told you that if I'm proven to be wrong, you will receive a full apology.
Believe it or not, I'd love to be proven wrong as I enjoy testing new engines.

[Norman Schmidt]

CCRL was given Dolphin to test. It seems to be another clone.

I'm really surprised and dissappointed to see these accusations by Olivier and Grant...

our intense debate on CCC forum about Rybka 1.0 this summer established one thing very clearly:

any author should be (assumed) innocent until proven guilty.

Myself, Zach, Bob, Christophe, etc. were severely criticized (by Grant and many others) for simply beginning the (derivative) discussion without 100% proof...

as far as i know there has been no info posted proving any of the engines mentioned in this thread to be clones? (if it has, and I missed it, my apologies.)

The chess engine community does not have a 8 member expert and authorataive 'clone' tribunal, perhaps such a 'jury' is needed to render expert determinations (instead of leaving up to individuals).

Gabor has it right:

Hi Olivier,

As far as I know, there are dozens of engines in your tournaments without source code supplied. Why are you making an exception with Dolphin?

Also, where is a tournament, even the World Championships, where anyone is obliged to provide his source code? No commercial would do so anyway.

Let's suppose innocence first. If it is a clone, we will find out sooner or later.

It shouldn't be left up to indviduals.

Norm

[Volker Pittlik]

...
Myself, Zach, Bob, Christophe, etc...

You are playing in that league?

...
The chess engine community...

And you are their spokesman?

[Roger Brown]

CCRL was given Dolphin to test. It seems to be another clone.

Hello Graham,

I personally find this casual statement a wee bit, well, shocking.

And not a bit shameless.

Quite frankly, you of all persons should not make the above statement without providing proof.

I recall that you demanded a high level of proof in the case of another engine so what is the difference here?

Oh, I see....

No Chessbase, no 3000+ Elo rating, no dominance on the rating list so no respect.

I do not know whether this engine is a clone and for the purpose of my rant, it really does not matter if it is or not.

What I am sickened by is the casual statement first and then subsequently promising to scrabble around to gather the facts.

I believe that no engine or its author deserves this treatment and it is hypocritical to give one author god like status - I have seen people more critical of god than of this author and his mighty engine - and treat another with contempt.

Promising to apologise if you are proven wrong seems to me much like assaulting someone and then saying sorry.

Before anyone says something silly, I do not know if the mighty engine is a clone or not - I am still waiting on another contributor in this thread to unveil the evidence (hint, hint ) - and until then I suggest that we all enjoy its exploits if we are so inclined.

So I think I will apologise to the author of this engine for unsupported comments made here.

Until it can be proven that it is a clone, no-one is going to make that accusation in this Forum. Once it is proven one way or another then please feel free to express yourselves one way or another. I will even join in!

I would advise all participants to give respect to all authors and not just a select few you may deem worthy. My only interest here is that justice be rendered for all and that we do not believe that we can apply radically different standards for what is the essentially the same offence.

Offence of course is in quotes.

I await the evidence.

Gábor wrote

Let's suppose innocence first. If it is a clone, we will find out sooner or later.

It makes sense to me. It is also the decent thing to do.

Later.