nightmagic: I pock des ned, wos d'Leit aus'm Englisch mocha.

Walter Montego: One should have to decide to be on vacation or not. A day, during which one makes a move in any game, never could be a vacation day. I feel frustrated, when opponents are playing other games, while mine would be delayed by automatic vacation.

plaintiger: please do not select Urdu, but instead the most traditioned lingua franca. This would not be Latin as presumed, but instead the much older language of SUMER. Probably that would also implicate the need to install some Cuneiform script fonts ...

emmett: I have had similar problems within a tournament. It would be helpful if the system would supply us with an average answering time for each player and game variant, and thus also would enable filtering such very slow players from tournaments.

Jules: Now (after hours) things suddenly are ok again. Maybe someone is filtering my line. ;-)

P.S.: Problems suddenly just have been back again.
P.P.S.: Now it is working well again. All very strange ....

Since today I have to switch off my Norton Internet Security to become able to see the BrainKing web pages.

Regards, Reinhard.

Pythagoras: ... and I have invested so much time to find intuitively unterstandable new symbols ...

Kipling: Well, I recommend symbols like those I have invented myself. You could have a look on them at the right side at http://www.chessbox.de/Compu/schachveri1_e.html

reza:

Well, there is of course no logic in it. Whenever I have argued against that avoidable war in Iraq and the resulting destruction of its society, I have had a hard stand. A lot of relicts of culture and the early growing of mankind out of stone age in Sumer have been ignoringly destroyed. Now it finally will result there in three independant sub states in Iraq. I hope that peace will take place there as soon as possible.

Fencer:

... and replaced by Capablanca Random Chess which is very similar to the Gothic ...

Let me place a correction here: there are more differences between CRC and GC than between Bird's and Ed Trice's starting array.

The main difference is the fact that each starting array will be selected randomly just before a game will be started (very similar to Chess960 / Fischer Random Chess).

A second difference is the intended target group. CRC originally has been created to establish a testing field for 10x8 chess programs avoiding huge opening libraries. GC already has big opening knowledge in some applications.

Thus CRC might fit better to the needs of creative players (from the very beginning) compared to more reproducing, opening book experienced players.

Regards, Reinhard.

Walter Montego:

In the current setup package of SMIRF beta there is a file "Variants.pgn" included containing that mirrored MBC. You can store a lot of other variant starting positions that way as long as they are using the Capablanca or traditional chess rules.

Like in Chess960 / Fischer Random Chess in CRC castling is defined by the END POSITIONS of involved King and Rook instead of the steps done by the King. Without that interpretation it would not be able to supply every CRC position with a castling ability. CRC uses only about 1/2 of those 48000 different setups to secure all paws to be covered, to remove some initial "traps".

Reinhard.

Walter Montego:

About CRC: CRC has been "invented" primarily targeting to create a new drosophila for computer - computer games. I am not sure, whether it would be too difficult to be played by human beings. But it is free to everybody who likes it.

About the Embassy array: as far as I know the castling rules of Embassy are different to all other 10x8 Capablanca piece set variants. Because of that circumstance I supplied SMIRF with an MBC related position, which is mirrored from the right to the left. That way it would be represented by the CRC array 25932 and it would be playable obeying the usual 10x8 castling rules.

[FEN "rnbackqbnr/pppppppppp/10/10/10/10/ PPPPPPPPPP/RNBACKQBNR w KQkq - 0 1"]

Regards, Reinhard.

Hrqls: The name SMIRF is an abbreviation for: "Strategic Game Program with intelligent recursing Facilities". If there would be too much jokes on it, I will give it a real name - maybe "WoW" (Wrath of Wotan), that would produce real fear and trembling.

Hrqls: Your idea is not that bad. But because even a program has a playing strength, why should it not have a BKR? I think, that a naming convention might be helpful: how about "Engine_Smirf"? May be the account Sumerian could be renamed / migrate into this.

Chessmaster1000: If you refuse my proposal, give me an alternative how I should behave.

harley: "... Sumerian is using one he has wrote himself, therefore can only be as good as his own play. (I guess!) ..."

Smirf has indeed become stronger now than I am playing without any books, written notations or gathered experiences.

Sumerian: I have added my proposal to my profile. It will become visible during the next time. Until now I havn't received any email or message related to this.

Flake: a) I have been explicitely invited including SMIRF to participate.
b) I am using a self written unfinished program. Regard it as if I would gather my experiences into just that form. There is no help from an external side.
c) Obviously the problem has not been the usage of Smirf but confessing that frankly. Thus arguing against me in that case is arguing against telling the truth.

ughaibu: That might be the task of those who want to make me leave that tournament just because I have frankly written what I am doing. Writing this open message to this board will do for me.

Well, I want to end the discussion here. Therefore I suggest the following:

If all other participants of that GC tournament would write me an email/message that they have not used a 10x8 playing computer program in that tournament and will not use one until its end, I will not continue playing in that tournament.

Hrqls: "...but what about players who joined the tournament before you did ?"

But what, if I haven't told anything about it? Would then all have been happy to live in a world of illusion? You could not change reality by penaltilyzing those who frankly speak on that what they do. And in my special case I only have organized MY OWN experiences into the form of an unready program, I am not using any bought product.

ughaibu: I do not expect it. But when one doesn't look, he should not be surprised, that he might have missed something.

BIG BAD WOLF: If one doesn't use his possibilities to get available informations about his opponents, you cannot blame the opponents for that. I do not make a secret of the fact, that the improving Smirf beta program mostly would be assisting me.

Again I point out that your problem is not this circumstance but that I frankly have published Smirf's usage in my profile. So following your arguments would not create a kind of "cleanroom", but instead a scene of players using hidden all kind of assistance instead of being able to freely provide open information on that.

And because Smirf will have its defined strength it is not necessary to exclude me / Smirf from being rated.

redsales: What is easy to prove is that I have written a program by myself. It would not make a lot of sense if someone will use a bought one, but you have no webcams on both sides to control what the opponents really are doing. Therefore it would make sense to encourage players to speak frankly on their way to produce good moves. If they would not be honest with that, they would mainly betray themself.

If you are interested in seriously testing, please send me a message with your ideas on that.

Andersp: Maybe my understanding of English is poor, I am from Old Germany. Seeing you being that engaged discussing using an 8x8 and 10x8 chess engine, you did not gave that impression to me. And if you vice versa would be willing to think my arguments over, you will easyly come to the conclusion, that there will be a big difference in using self written engines or external know how.

Andersp: If you would like to participate in tournaments without Smirf present, why did you not have entered in the European Chess960 Quick Motivation Tournament http://brainking.com/game/Tournaments?trg=7146&tri=29371&trnst=0 , where I offer to the winner a Chess960 book I have written myself?

Andersp: It seems to me that you have no idea how I am changing and improving the beta during a game, reacting on experiences. But that is indeed irrelevant. I would suggest to change your view on the opponent, see the engine instead of its operator / programmer, and notify its strictly limited use of persistant data. (It is a 48K engine only, no opening library, no table bases).

to Andersp: If you have written your own engine, proof that fact, and make its usage transparent - where should be the problem, when only playing when being invited (where the opponent has seen your profile page) or after asking him, whether he would like to play against an engine.
to BrainKing04: Smirf is not an outside program. It is my own intellectual property. And if you are convinced that I should be banned from here, you have to initiate the appropriate steps.

Andersp: well it is not at all fun, that those who frankly give information on using self written engines will be accused here, whereas a remote using of foreign programs is no theme at all. The problem seems to be that the truth is destructing some illusions, but I cannot change reality by denying it.

Andersp: Smirf will have big difficulties to be victorious there, on what I am in doubt. Moreover it has not been me who initially asked to participate. Instead the tournament creator repeatedly encouraged me to participate, explicitly allowing the use of Smirf. It seems to be of a special interest for him to watch it play there, which I of course can understand. I think it is the genuine right of a tournament's creator to decide who should be accepted as a participant in such an event.

Andersp: everybody has the right to give his experiences an appropriate form. But there is a huge difference in using a self written engine or relying on the intellectual properties of others.

Well, there are some purists who want me leave this site. The world seems to be ok for those if all would tell them those things they want to hear, and don't tell them those they don't want.

But by that you do not create a reality but establisch an agreement to further believe in an illusion. Reality will vanish if you make it a problem to tell the truth. The sun will not take an orbit round the earth if you insist that earth should be the unmoved center of the universe.

P.S.: Think it over: the problem has not been that I am using a SELF written engine sometimes, but that I have documented this at my profile frankly. Those which are using programs written by OTHERS secretly instead do not cause a problem.

redsales: make a suggestion how to handle that situation in that tournament, so that you would be satisfied, too.

Entering that GC tournament I have not been sure to get that good results in round one. Nevertheless round two will not be that easy to any of the participants. You seem to forget that Smirf still is only a 48K baby of a beta and a victory is not at all realistic.

reza: I do not know whether you have followed the development process of Smirf, which has been first released as a very weak beta to participate at Ed Trice's GC event in November 2004, where it has reached place four of eight. Since that moment Smirf has been improved further step by step, actually being some hundreds of Elo stronger than then.

You should understand that I am not using Smirf here for to get a maximum BKR, but to experience some program properties. Thus the results are very different. E.g. when playing Janus Chess mostly very experimental variants of Smirf have been used, bearing the risk to be beaten, what has been done e.g. by Walter Montego several times. It also had been of interest to learn, whether Smirf would be recognized immediately as a playing engine or not. It seems to play more like a human being, and my opponents hardly were able to distinguish whether I or Smirf have been playing.

I think that the improvements and overall behaviour of Smirf might be of special interest to Ed Trice, especially within tough tournaments. There are only few other Gothic Chess enabled programs still under development. Smirf of course is of interest in the scene because it is able to play a lot of 10x8 and 8x8 different chess variants using ONE super small engine for all.

I am still searching for competent beta testers. If you might be interested, send me a message on your personal testing goals. Those testers will get an individual key to make the Smirf beta play without any restriction.

reza: No need to apologize - I think you are a serious young man, actually been upset by me using Smirf at times. But it would help to try to have an also serious talk on that matter instead of leaving a bad smell in a room just before closing the door.

Concerning the actual GC tournament I have been explicitly invited by its creator allowing me the use of SMIRF. May be it would be better to mention this fact below at the tournament details, but that is no place I myself would be able to write.

I never have participated in tournaments without asking its creator, whether I would be welcomed also using Smirf or not, and having that accepted.

reza: comparing me to a murderer?

Pafl: there is a big difference, if one is using a self written program, which is slightly comparable to the use of own game notations or entering those into a data base system, and the usage of a program created by others. The situation could be cleared by showing the existence of such an own engine. Thus SMIRF could be downloaded as a somehow shrinked beta from my website: http://www.chessbox.de/beta.html at Project Chronicle 2004-Dec-10.

I have written a small 48K engine named SMIRF. Nobody would have noticed, because it plays very similar to a weak humans. I am astonished how much fear seems to be connected with this unfinished small beta of my first chess programming trial since 25 years. Smirf does not use table bases or huge opening libraries. And it has been created all by myself, not patchworking of any foreign sources. Thus there is no outside help or assistance. Smirf is the target into which I organize my experiences.

Analysing what has been written here, the root of this discusson is not that I am using a self written program, but that I have confessed frankly to that situation. I am very sure, that Smirf would not have been recognized as a program, if I would not have published that fact on my profile.

So, to what this discussion would lead us? It will fight against the reasons of this quarrel, and that is, that poeple have been honest. Therefore think it over, what you might earn from that discussion: simply a vanishing of honesty.