Talk:Top Chess Engine Championship

Tone of the notable games section

Nice to see new chess related articles on wikipedia. This article is very nice, but needs work on the tone and references. Please see WP:SLANG and WP:IMPARTIAL. I am particular referring to the notable games section, e.g.

Stockfish thrashes Shredder
Junior pulls of a masterpiece, abundant with countless sacrifices.
Shredder pulls off a brilliant save, at the brink of defeat. The final combination is a one for history books!

This style of writing is just not encyclopedic and ideally should be replaced with more neutral prose. In addition, this complete section is unreferenced, and on the basis of that alone should be kept as neutral as possible. Voorlandt (talk) 13:32, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the insight. I am relatively new to wikipedia and its my first article. I wrote that section in that tone, because I wanted to emphasize on the the "notability" of the games I selected. Maybe it sounded too partial... I'll work on improving it as soon as possible. Maybe I'll look up some other annotations from similar chess wikipedia articles and get some idea of how to implement it. As far as references go, Ill surely be adding more as time goes by. Thanks for your input. ∞4 (talk) 18:19, 23 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done I have changed the tone of the notable games section and added tons of new references. (I removed the tone tag now.)∞4 (talk) 19:52, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest a second pass - I still see some rather informal words such as "sac" and "clueless". GregorB (talk) 18:52, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an engine programmer, not a wiki editor. Not sure how or where to reply (in the above) to the removed notable games. First: I highly appreciate the attempt to fix them up. However, several reasonable games were deleted -- some of which I have often mentioned to other chess programmers, and chess enthusiasts. E.g. bringing the king out into the center of the board, with the expected response to bring it to the 4th rank. That's exceptionally notable. It doesn't require a GM or IM or anyone other than an amateur that knows castling is best to understand how incredible this is. I've analyzed that position with days of CPU power. Please reconsider and bring back the list. These games are a large reason TCEC is amazing. It's just not good chess. Or which engine is best. Or the best chess available. It's sometimes a redefinition of what humans and computers believe are good moves. Further, sometimes notable is merely the ability of one engine to know the other is in severe trouble before the other has a hint. It's incredible from a scientific, or at least AI, standpoint, if not from chess itself. Please keep up the good work fixing up these pages. Now my attempt to sign: 67.185.163.246 (talk) 03:06, 13 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just came across this article. WOW. Some of the stuff here violates WP:WTA and WP:NPV on so many levels that it defies belief. Toccata quarta (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source

http://www.dagbladet.no/2011/02/06/nyheter/sjakk/data_og_teknologi/15335985/ Regards, Sun Creator^(talk) 20:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have seen this article before but due to my lack of understanding of its language, I was unable to properly source it. If you could do this, it would be appreciated. ∞4 (talk) 21:25, 4 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The TCEC 10 twitch SCAM! - A.R.B :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FoXOOO9VdkA

TCEC 10 Started on October 2017 using the Chatwing Chat,everything was OK! ? and Stockfish started with it’s Normal lead in the Games Tables,as has been seen before in other TCEC Seasons.

Then the Strange SCAM! things started! ? TCEC Started to notice people were still posting how they felt about other TCEC Seasons,namely the SCAM! Games that had happened before and how Komodo had managed to somehow Win ? Some TCEC’s from extraordinary circumstances!

TCEC decided it was time for a change to all this (The TRUTH! Hurts too much!) so they then implemented the (twitch) Chat to make sure the (2) ChessBase.com Commercial Engines Houdini & Komodo would not be bothered in any way by the Chat ? (It has happened before where Chat has let TCEC restart some Komodo games it lost!) ?. The result of the (twitch) Chat being used was at least 70% of the regular Chatwing users leaving, because of how Bad! The (twitch) Chat was/is! where people could no longer have a normal conversation on the Chat,or be able to post any links,without some kind of Ban! First a small Ban, then a medium Ban,and finally having their account closed! :(

The next Strange thing to happen was Stockfish started to lose games! ? (Well actually it is the TCEC Norm! So not so Strange!) but the difference this time was not the (Lazy-SMP-Problem) from another season,but a (Time-Management-Problem) ? and the really Strange thing is that this happened just after the Start of TCEC 10 ??? Somehow a Bogus version of Stockfish got through the (Fishcooking-Testing) with the (Time-Managment-Problem) {This definitely was not the No.1 Stockfish (TCEC 9) Winner playing}.

The rest as they say is History! :( Now the (2) ChessBase.com Commercial Engines Houdini & Komodo had a FREE! Run where at least one of them would win ? TCEC 10.

Below is the Real! Stockfish (non-TCEC-10 Version) Winning (2) recent Chess Engine Championships,against the same versions of Houdini & Komodo plus other Top Engines as used in TCEC 10.

Houdini 8CPU v Stockfish 8CPU, ChessGUI2 https://live.chessbase.com/games/Houdini-8CPU-v-Stockfish-8CPU?isCordova=False

Stockfish Wins Chess.com Computer Championship… https://www.chess.com/news/view/stockfish-wins-chess-com-computer-championship

A.R.B :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gavin Brooks (talk • contribs) 10:29, 16 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Poor join

Supported by original engine authors and based on volunteer work and donations, it caused a surprise in February 2011, when the free version of Houdini defeated the then reigning computer chess champion Rybka in a 40-game match.

This is crammage with no value add. The two sentence halves don't even properly relate to each other. And that entire grammatical device is best confined to PR or other puff genres to begin with. — MaxEnt 01:20, 26 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

S14 superfinal

HI. I'm not sure how one got that there is a superfinal going on for season 14. On the live games page it makes no mention that the current game being played is part of season 14. Any help?123.243.100.66 (talk) 03:46, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The superfinal's scheduled to start sometime around early February, after the TCEC Cup and the AlphaZero simulation. The finalists are confirmed, though. Banedon (talk) 19:56, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well it's already ongoing according to the article.211.27.115.246 (talk) 02:37, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Does the article say the superfinal is ongoing? Where? Banedon (talk) 04:27, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I misread. Sorry.211.27.115.246 (talk) 11:42, 20 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Posting about Houdini and Fire

Posting as a heads up Saw this on TCEC twitch chat, apparently on discord, too:

On behalf of TCEC I want to formally acknowledge that the later versions of Houdini and Fire that played at TCEC have unfortunately been found to covertly contain code copied and taken from other engines, and these two engines have therefore been removed from further participation as well as from those past final standings in which they took a prize place. -kan aka kanchess

Could someone look in to this some more? No doubt, some things will be changing in the sources used for the article. LuciusAreliusVerus (talk) 14:35, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Did kanchess say which past final standings are affected? One could add this information into the article on Houdini as well, but it's a contentious claim, so it could really use a source more reliable than a screenshot of the Discord announcement. Banedon (talk) 01:15, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything too official. Comparing the current winners list at https://tcec-chess.com/ with what is in the main Wikipedia article, Season 10 Houdini has been replaced with Komodo as winner with no new 2nd place shown, Season 11 Houdini has been removed as 2nd place with no new 2nd place shown, Cup 1 Houdini has been removed as 2nd place with no new 2nd place shown, and Cup 2 Houdini has been removed as 2nd place with no new 2nd place shown. Season 6 FRC, Season 9 Rapid, and Season 10 Rapid I'm not sure as that would be in the Archives part and I don't know how much we can trust that outside of personal interest. Fire does not appear on the Wikipedia winners list or the above linked list and they have not changed some old seasons with presumably older versions of Houdini participating. I did not check the Wikipedia list against the above linked list for anything that did not list Houdini or Fire on Wikipedia. LuciusAreliusVerus (talk) 14:11, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tournament structure

I believe that section is too long and goes into unnecessary detail. Just the structure of the last season in my opinion is enough. Betseg (talk) 07:16, 28 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do agree that all of the historical structural details can go as they are available on the "Archive" tab on the website itself. Ideally, I would like to some more details about the current top engines than just the two finalists. My reasoning is that there are quite a couple of really outstanding chess engines that will not get any mentioning at all on Wikipedia otherwise. This is much more acute since the recent removal of the sub-pages detailing the seasons. User: Sukram — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2454:8D55:500:C997:8ED5:ECB9:68D7 (talk) 11:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have just significantly decluttered the entire page, kind of creative destruction, hopefully this leads towards a more focused future. User: Sukram — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:2454:8D55:500:FD4B:2CB:60EA:60C0 (talk) 18:50, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]