Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Talk about upcoming tournaments or your experience at tournaments.

Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:59 am

http://brainking.com/en/Tournaments?trg ... nst=0&tp=7

Free to enter and join up! We have 17 already there, including George Miller, with 15 slots open.

It is a single elimination event, which means if you lose, you don't play in the next round.

Only about 6 days left to fill the slots, otherwise it will be cancelled.
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby AKA on Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:59 am

I pick Ed Trice's WCC to win.
AKA
 

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:45 am

It's OPC, much stronger than WCC, get it right.

Image
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby AKA on Mon Jul 24, 2006 12:33 pm

Oh, so you finaly admit after 9 yearst that you are going to use a program? Great!
AKA
 

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:29 pm

No, I just told you that OPC is much stronger than WCC. If you're going to accuse me of using a program, don't you want to be intelligent enough to accuse me of using the proper one? I mean, why not just accuse me of using a random move generator, like that Wyllie program?
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby AKA on Mon Jul 24, 2006 2:55 pm

Oh, I don't have to accuse you of using a program anymore...it's already a known fact that you do.
AKA
 

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 4:30 pm

Well, let's take a look at some facts, or are you afraid of them, as part of your name suggests? NOTE: His name WAS FearFactor before he changed it.

From the Chinook website here:

http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~chinook/WallofHonor.php

...you can plainly see:

=========================

Intermediate Level:
23. Ed Trice, March 18, 2001
86. Ed Trice, October 21, 1996

Amateur Level:
52. Ed Trice, October 20, 1996

Novice Level:
286. Ed Trice, October 20, 1996

=========================

I think I was the first person to defeat Chinook on the web twice in one day, and if you read the Intermediate Level list from bottom-up, I was only the fifth person to defeat it on its strongest setting (after James Davis, Valtas Hockenbury, Carl Reno, and Richard Fortman.)

In 1996, Dr. Schaeffer had not even made his 6-piece databases publicly available as of yet. In fact, when I emailed him and expressed interest in writing a Macintosh checkers program, he suggested that I get in contact with a person named Gil Dodgen, who had already written one.

So I contacted Gil, told him Dr. Schaeffer game me his contact info, and he asked "So how did you hear about Schaeffer?" I told him he had this program called Chinook and it was on the web and I won a few games against it.

Gil was immediately impressed and asked if I would play a telephone game against his Cornell Checkers program. When I managed to win, he suggested that we collaborate on a new program together, I would help with the evaluation function and graphics, he would try and optimize the search engine.

We both were in touch with Dr. Schaeffer, and Gil politely asked: "Is there any chance we could 'borrow' your 6-piece database?" Dr. Schaeffer said since the databases were created partly from University funding and partly from grant money, he was not sure they would be allowed to be integrated into a commerical product. A few months later, he was given the OK to distribute them, but not privately: they had to be public domain. Again, he held back for a while because he didn't think there would be enough interest and he didn't think anyone would "decipher" how to make the databases readable at runtime. After Gil and I showed him the Mac version with our own 4-piece databases, he eventually did put his 6-piece db online, with some sample source code.

Just remember, in 1997, when they were first hosted, 46 MB was a huge file to download, and I think 14,400 baud was widely available, meaning it was a very long download.

WCC was finally released on August 13, 1997 which was 10 months after I beat Chinook.

So, which "program" was I using when I defeated Chinook in 1996?

And, on a slightly different topic, when I played the Deep Thought chess supercomputer in 1989 (the same year I stopped playing tournament chess) in front of about 50 observers milling around, what program was I using then?

http://www.chessgames.com/perl/chessgame?gid=1272214

It was, after all, the World Champion of Computer Chess, not dissimilar from Chinook, but I suppose you have an explanation for this as well.
Last edited by EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:29 pm, edited 1 time in total.
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby Mr. Checkers on Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:32 pm

Ed your positive contributions to checkers are well documented in checker history, so please don't feel it necessary to justify them to those who are unaware and not familiar with them. It is always easy to find fault in others--all of us have experienced that from time to time here or in other forums. So please just continue your positive contributions to checkers and let those negatives in life remain part of the past, which none of us can go back and change anyway.
Take care and God Bless. "Mr. Checkers"---Visit with "Inky" at: http://www.broenink-art.nl/maukie2.swf----"No act of kindness no matter how small is ever wasted". --Aesop--
Mr. Checkers
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:05 pm
Location: Dubuque, Iowa

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby Alex_Moiseyev on Mon Jul 24, 2006 5:48 pm

EdTrice wrote:WCC was finally released on August 13, 1997


I rememmber this moment. Ed had on Microsoft Gamezone nickname ... something like "IDEFEATEVERYONE". On this day in August he made an announecemnt about "official birth" of new program - WCC (World Checkers Champion).

Later Ed used "WCC", and "WorldCheckersChamopion" nicknames on gamezone, when he wanted program to play, and he used "EdTrice" nickname, when he played on his own.

If I am inaccurate with fatcs, Ed can correct me. 10 years - not a small period and my memory did not improve since then :roll:

Regards,

:angel13:
Alex
I am playing checkers, not chess.
User avatar
Alex_Moiseyev
 
Posts: 4082
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2005 5:03 pm

The history of my time in the Zone, and the WCC myth

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 8:43 pm

shr wrote:
I rememmber this moment. Ed had on Microsoft Gamezone nickname ... something like "IDEFEATEVERYONE". On this day in August he made an announecemnt about "official birth" of new program - WCC (World Checkers Champion).

Later Ed used "WCC", and "WorldCheckersChamopion" nicknames on gamezone, when he wanted program to play, and he used "EdTrice" nickname, when he played on his own.

Alex


Well, there is a lot more to the story, but it is partially correct. Please recall at some point in time people started "cloning" and creating names claiming they were me when this was not the case.

My original name was TheHoodedClaw which was kind of a joke. I was amazed that so many people created what I thought were "funny" names. So, I picked the "most ridiculous" name I could think of, from some cartoon I saw once when I was a kid.

Anyway, I started taking a few beatings there, just like anybody else did. This is late 1995/early 1996 now. Somebody was nice enough to tell me what I was doing wrong in my game. Mentioning odd terms like the double corner, a single corner cramp, a "2x1" (which I thought was a math statement, equal to 2 of course!) and such things. I was grateful to this person.

His name was OMO, and he told to me to look online for names such as atuck and gloc and krow and huckabuk. He said follow their games, and watch what they do.

It was about this time I had learned the number notation for writing down moves. I could usually scribble down about a dozen moves for both players before making either a transcription error or they were just moving too fast as I watched from the anonymous sidelines of the internet.

I noticed some of them played the same moves, sometimes 5,6 or even as much as 10 moves deep into the game. I quickly learned the single corner opening with the Lucy Lang attack, the Pioneer (which was a favorite of gloc), the Whilter, the Will O' The Wisp, the Wagram, Old 14th, etc. I even started relating checkers opening to chess openings. I felt the Single Corner played much like Ruy Lopez, and the Switcher was like the Sicilian Defence, the Pioneer like the Pirc Defense, etc.

Then Chinook came online. I decided I would "take a poke" at it. I was getting better by this time, I was beating most of the checkers fledglings about 3 months later, while still getting destroyed by some of the players I found out were from the state of Kentucky. But, I had an "army of moves" from the these great players to try against the program.

I took an "open book" exam against Chinook, using some of the games I had from atuck and gloc, two of the players that seemed to play the most on the zone.

Chinook swerved at move 11, I was out of book. By move 14 it said something taunting, like "You are in big trouble.." and it was not hype. I was dead not too much later.

BUT, I had a new move to try on gloc. Would it work?

It took maybe a dozen games with them to finally be able to spring Chinook move #11 on either gloc or atuck. And, finally, they each had to think for a while, no longer were instant replies coming back. Each played different response than Chinook did. I was on my own. Even though I was replaying Chinook's move and lasting longer before they trounced me, after revisting Chinook, having to play many games with it before I could "plug in" their move and see its response, then revisit the zone and have to play constantly for another 2 weeks to be able to spring Chinook's new reply on them, I learned something very quickly.

THIS WAS NOT THE WAY TO GET BETTER AT CHECKERS!

Committing play to memory and constantly revisiting hand written notes was getting me nowhere. I needed understanding, and I did not understand why I was losing.

So I tuned out of the zone for a while. I bought a checkerboard. I replayed these zone games, from both sides, over and over. I still played Chinook, sometimes for 2 or 3 hours a day, still taking notes. In fact, I was the reason Dr. Schaeffer first required an email address to let you play, I was hogging the machine!

Finally, I started to see patterns emerge from the board. I saw "holds" and "diamond positions" that were just bad. I finally understood the Fife opening and what "man-down" play was all about. The doghole pattern started to make sense. Bridges were still a problem for me, but at least I could get in and get out and maintain a solid defense now against Chinook.

I finally could draw against it. I was very excited!

It was also about this time I saw the name of MarionTinsley on the Chinook site. I read about this great checkers player.

So, I logged back onto the zone, and was shocked to see this name was still available. So, I registered it.

When I came back on, I was dismayed at the treatment I received. People were chastising me. I had no idea what was going on. It was about the one year anniversary of his death, I was told by OMO who was his friend. It turned out OMO was Don Lafferty.

Don told me while in a chess lobby somebody coming in named Kasparov or Karpov would be assumed to be some chess hot-shot, or someone hoping to immitate the style of the grandmasters, that is not the way it was in the checkers world. I still came on and observed people with this account. Those who would come to the table I was at and said something to me, I realized were the "serious" checker players.

I made a new book of games with only these players' names in it. I had about 40-50 players who convinced me to stop playing under this account.

So I created another brand new account, one which I forget. But I was playing with my "new knowledge" I had learned while away from the zone. I was relaxed, more confident, and nobody would know it was really TheHoodedClaw playing them.

The results were positive. I finally drew atuck, gloc, and even beat huckabuk when he played into an in-and-out shot. Boy did they give him a razzing (it was friendly of course!)

I continued this strategy of maintaining my notebooks, creating other accounts to observe the "star players", writing down their moves, checking with Chinook when I could, then I added another task: play blindfold

I wanted to be able to construct the terminal positions of the games I had replayed. It took a while, and the best way to do it I discovered was to replay EVERY move every time you moved, not just "the new move." While this accumulative approach took some getting used to, it was the best way to play blindfold. About another 6 weeks later I could rattle off 30-40 moves and have no problem setting up the right position in the end.

The impact on my play was tremendous. I won two games back-to-back against atuck, had a 2 draws against llion (who was Leo Levitt of California) and then got beat by OMO.

It was about this time that I finally beat Chinook on the web. I was ready. I created the account EdTrice and decided to use my real name, since those that would peruse the Chinook site would know who I was in the zone.

At first, it was nothing major. I had to wait in line to play the great ones, since I was an unknown, again, to this group. Gradually, I got some games, and was pitted against the "chain of command." Apparently they had a pecking order. If you beat so-and-so, they would line you up against someone they recognized was stronger. I went through the gauntlet, drawing most, winning a fair share, until I was faced with OMO

I just couldn't crack Don's armour in freestyle play. He drew game after game. But one fine day, in a 10-15 opening he was playing "just for fun", I managed to draw blood. The whole gang was there to witness it. Now don't get me wrong, I lost my fair share of games, but that one win gave me some sort of recognition from this elite group.

Al Lyman put the game on the "primenet\~krow.html" page that was the ACF website for so long. When I came into the zone, I did not have to wait as long to get a game, and some players actually started sitting down at my table!

It was a nice change. The group really made you feel welcome. The games were interesting, the discussion was polite and respectful during the course of your play, and it was thoroughly enjoyable.

It was about this time Gil and I started chatting about making a new program. It would be a large undertaking. I told him when it was ready, we had the perfect opportunity to test it against a group of enthusiastic players.

And that is when I created the WorldChampionshipCheckers name, which I think was just WCC due to the length of its name. But, I always identified it as a program, and I told everyone it had a 6-piece database loaded into RAM, and it was a "very fast" searching program, capable of (at the time) 225,000 nodes/second!

This seems incredibly slow by today's standard, but back then, it was tremendous. I think what shocked everyone was that I put strong replies to all of their games in the WCC book. So, I had "anti-book" moves for every strong player on the game zone in WCC.

That is responsible for the "legend" of WCC, if you want to call it that.

As you can see, my own self-study and preparation is what was able to make it the worthy opponents of those that crossed swords with it.

NOT the other way around.
Last edited by EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 11:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby AKA on Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:02 pm

Want to play some games at Kurnik, Ed Trice?
AKA
 

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Mon Jul 24, 2006 9:05 pm

Kurnik wrote:Want to play some games at Kurnik, Ed Trice?


You haven't answered my two questions:

1. What checkers program do you claim I was running when I defeated Chinook in October of 1996?

2. What chess program do you claim I running when I defeated Deep Thought in 1989 in front of over 50 onlookers?

Until you answer those questions, you will be perpetually ignored.
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby AKA on Tue Jul 25, 2006 11:51 am

It doesn't matter what I say, you still won't play me at kurnik :lol:
AKA
 

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby Mr. Checkers on Tue Jul 25, 2006 12:44 pm

Take care and God Bless. "Mr. Checkers"---Visit with "Inky" at: http://www.broenink-art.nl/maukie2.swf----"No act of kindness no matter how small is ever wasted". --Aesop--
Mr. Checkers
 
Posts: 1321
Joined: Sun Nov 20, 2005 3:05 pm
Location: Dubuque, Iowa

Re: Online Tournament, Mail-Play time controls

Postby EdTrice on Tue Jul 25, 2006 5:35 pm

Kurnik wrote:It doesn't matter what I say.


I am sure that statement is true, that what you say does not matter, perhaps to many people.

You still haven't answered my questions.
--Ed
User avatar
EdTrice
 
Posts: 97
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2006 2:39 am
Location: Philadelphia

Next

Return to Tournament Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron
class=