Paderborn 2007 - HIARCS WINS!

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 2:27 am

turbojuice1122 wrote:Congratulations on your shared first place in Paderborn!

History will record the winner in 2007 as Hiarcs. Nobody remembers who came 2nd.

Dylan Sharp · Post by **Dylan Sharp** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 4:13 am

Harvey Williamson wrote:History will record the winner in 2007 as Hiarcs. Nobody remembers who came 2nd.

Then history is unfair. And you'd probably be doing the same if Hiarcs won a shared first prize, with the Hiarcs and Rybka's order, reversed.

peter · Post by **peter** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 7:33 am

...and a happy new year!

What a great success finally in old year! Would'nt it be even greater for selling Hiarcs and helping development of the next big step 12 to give 11.9 to the old and the new users?
The first ones as well as the others would surely hope for an update price for 12 and beating Rybka 64bit with an Hiarcs 32bit look forward twice as impatiently to Hiarcs 64bit to buy it as a must-have again

Sincerely
Peter.

P.S. Probably it would be even better sales strategy than of chessbase with fritz 11 SP awaiting deepfritz 11 later on.

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 8:29 am

Dylan Sharp wrote:
Harvey Williamson wrote:History will record the winner in 2007 as Hiarcs. Nobody remembers who came 2nd.
Then history is unfair. And you'd probably be doing the same if Hiarcs won a shared first prize, with the Hiarcs and Rybka's order, reversed.

Your wrong I would have congratulated Vas and Jeroen as they have congratulated me. btw there is no shared 1st prize - we got the first prize and Rybka got the 2nd.

To quote Jeroen:

In the end we ended on 5.5 points, just like Hiarcs. Hiarcs won because of the better Bochholz score, something we already knew before the last round was started: a simple calculation showed that a Hiarcs victory was enough to clinch victory. Of course I'd like to congratulate the Hiarcs team for this splendid achievement! Mark, Harvey, Sebastian, well done!

He then said to people on the Rybka Forum:

I hope you liked our live coverage and of course don't be too depressed because of '2nd spot only'

In a Soccer League if points are = they use things like Goal difference/average to decide the winner this is no different.

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 8:58 am

http://www.hiarcs.com/Games/pader07/pader07.pgn

Download all the games in pgn format.

Sebastian Boehme · Post by **Sebastian Boehme** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:24 pm

Hi fellows,

I agree with Harvey and this is what belongs to sportmanship in chess: To accept that somebody won.

Jeroen Noomen came to me after the win of Hiarcs was official and saying: "Congratulations, Hiarcs deserves it."

I think this is what one should call real sportsmanship and I would have done the same at Jeroen's point.
Sometimes there can only be one winner, no matter how equal the scores are, the Buchholz-Rating decided it all this time and thus there is only 1 winner.

Kind regards,
Sebastian Boehme

Hetman · Post by **Hetman** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:44 pm

Congratulations to Hiarcs for the win.
The proper strategy without the lose. As the wise experienced GM

.
The win at the end of the year is important.

Regards
Hetman

turbojuice1122 · Post by **turbojuice1122** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 5:53 pm

History will record the winner in 2007 as Hiarcs. Nobody remembers who came 2nd.

Generally when I hear about winners of tournaments, then they say "equal first" if there was a tie, no matter what particular "tie-breaking" rules were used. If Paderborn "officially" only gives the prize to the winner via their particular arbitrary tie-break rules (e.g. if Sofia rules were used, which actually probably are more accurate for determining who is "better" since it really does seem to be easier to score two draws than one win, then Rybka would have "won"), then they are making a technical error, but if there is no other way to do it and that's what the rules specify, then fine. The proper way to remember it is that Hiarcs and Rybka were co-winners with Hiarcs having the benefit of the tie-breaking rules that were used. My congratulations to the Hiarcs team would be the same no matter which rules were used: they scored enough points in the tournament to tie with Rybka at the end.

Post by **Harvey Williamson** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 6:38 pm

turbojuice1122 wrote:
History will record the winner in 2007 as Hiarcs. Nobody remembers who came 2nd.
Generally when I hear about winners of tournaments, then they say "equal first" if there was a tie, no matter what particular "tie-breaking" rules were used. If Paderborn "officially" only gives the prize to the winner via their particular arbitrary tie-break rules (e.g. if Sofia rules were used, which actually probably are more accurate for determining who is "better" since it really does seem to be easier to score two draws than one win, then Rybka would have "won"), then they are making a technical error, but if there is no other way to do it and that's what the rules specify, then fine. The proper way to remember it is that Hiarcs and Rybka were co-winners with Hiarcs having the benefit of the tie-breaking rules that were used. My congratulations to the Hiarcs team would be the same no matter which rules were used: they scored enough points in the tournament to tie with Rybka at the end.

And I am sure you would be posting this stuff if Rybka had been awarded the win

Dylan Sharp · Post by **Dylan Sharp** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 9:41 pm

turbojuice1122 wrote: they scored enough points in the tournament to tie with Rybka at the end.

Then again, Hiarcs won unshared first place (even if due to a technicality.) I had to change my opinion since even Jeroen accepts 2nd place.

Post by **Steve B** » Mon Dec 31, 2007 10:55 pm

Dylan Sharp wrote:

Then again, Hiarcs won unshared first place (even if due to a technicality.) I had to change my opinion since even Jeroen accepts 2nd place.

Very Good Dylan
soon you will have even more on your mind..

a Rybkian loss to a human GM in an 8 game match

Joel Benjamin Sends His New Years Regards
Steve

Theo van der Storm · Post by **Theo van der Storm** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 12:08 am

Harvey Williamson wrote:http://www.hiarcs.com/Games/pader07/pader07.pgn

Download all the games in pgn format.

Nope, those are only the Hiarcs games.

I provided the webmaster of the official site with normalised PGN
for all games.

http://wwwcs.uni-paderborn.de/~IPCCC/IP ... /games.pgn

Congratulations and Happy New Year!
Theo

Dylan Sharp · Post by **Dylan Sharp** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:01 am

Steve B wrote:a Rybkian loss to a human GM in an 8 game match

I wouldn't bet my life on it. Possibly Rybka is going to use a new "Undrawable" personality that eventually will crush the GM.

And I'd be happy if this happens, otherwise that would mean that White can draw at will, no matter the opponent. This would be bad for the game.

Post by **Steve B** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 1:30 am

Dylan Sharp wrote:
Steve B wrote:a Rybkian loss to a human GM in an 8 game match
I wouldn't bet my life on it. Possibly Rybka is going to use a new "Undrawable" personality that eventually will crush the GM.

And I'd be happy if this happens, otherwise that would mean that White can draw at will, no matter the opponent. This would be bad for the game.

actually i think if the Human GM wins it means that humans can still compete on an even level against the computer as White without unnatural odds of material or time..which changes the fundamental game

as Black..i think they can no longer compete on an even level

GM 5 or 6 ..Rybka 3 or 2 Regards
Steve

Dylan Sharp · Post by **Dylan Sharp** » Tue Jan 01, 2008 6:57 am

Steve B wrote:actually i think if the Human GM wins it means that humans can still compete on an even level against the computer as White without unnatural odds of material or time.

But they could just draw at will, so why bother?