Author |
Topic: 2011 World Championship (Read 21191 times) |
|
Janzert
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #247
Gender: 
Posts: 1016
|
 |
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #105 on: Jan 12th, 2011, 9:04am » |
 Quote  Modify
|
on Jan 12th, 2011, 5:04am, ocmiente wrote:It took a while to run this (a few hours) because the framework relaunches my application for each tournament round. If there is some kind of plug-in option that lets the scheduler avoid this app startup time, please let me know.
|
|
Does the C# runtime really take an appreciable part of a minute to start? I would tend to suspect that your pairing code is actually taking the majority of that time.
For comparison my FTE code written in python* takes less than a minute and a half for the same run.
Code:run4 'formats/floatTripElimJanzert' 100 16 500 50 0
1 48.0%
2 19.0%
3 10.0%
4 11.0%
5 8.0%
6 3.0%
10 1.0%
average number of rounds = 10.28
minimum number of rounds = 9
maximum number of rounds = 12
average rating from best = 31.0
Elapsed Time: 1:08.57 |
|
Janzert
* certainly not known for its speed although the startup time is probably not too bad
|
|
 IP Logged |
|
|
|
ocmiente
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #3996
Gender:
Posts: 194
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #106 on: Jan 12th, 2011, 10:12am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 12th, 2011, 9:04am, Janzert wrote:
Does the C# runtime really take an appreciable part of a minute to start? I would tend to suspect that your pairing code is actually taking the majority of that time.
|
|
Fairly certain. I can run an entire tournament in process in much less than a second. I see there is a Java format there, does anyone know if that has similar issues?
I suspect the easy answer is to port it to C++, or maybe create a webservice.
[Edit]
I found the problem. One should almost never write code when sick. Hopefully, I'll snap out of it before my game Sunday 
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 12th, 2011, 11:14am by ocmiente » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #107 on: Jan 12th, 2011, 11:24pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I usually run about 2000 tournaments to get somewhat stable values. Otherwise the values can fluctuate quite a bit. Also if the format makes use of initial seedings then it's good to test it with a rating inaccuracy of 200 (instead of the typical 50).
See this thread for some results I had posted after comparing various formats:
http://arimaa.com/arimaa/forum/cgi/YaBB.cgi?board=events;action=display; num=1249653915;start=75
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 12th, 2011, 11:26pm by omar » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ginrunner
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #5449
Gender:
Posts: 163
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #108 on: Jan 13th, 2011, 1:33am » |
Quote Modify
|
b599 and I have both agreed to move our game time to 3PM Monday Arizona time. If needed I can forward the emails to whomever necessary.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #109 on: Jan 13th, 2011, 10:00am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 13th, 2011, 1:33am, ginrunner wrote:| b599 and I have both agreed to move our game time to 3PM Monday Arizona time. If needed I can forward the emails to whomever necessary. |
|
I've changed the game time.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ocmiente
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #3996
Gender:
Posts: 194
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #110 on: Jan 13th, 2011, 3:42pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 12th, 2011, 11:24pm, omar wrote:
I went ahead and ran the simulations for my code using the same parameters you recommended. The results appear to be consistent with the other triple elimination tournament formats. It took 1 hour, 34 minutes to run 2000 tournament simulations on a fairly fast machine.
Code:
run4 'formats/FoySim' 2000 16 500 50 9999
1 34.1%
2 24.9%
3 15.8%
4 10.8%
5 6.3%
6 3.0%
7 2.3%
8 1.6%
9 0.8%
10 0.3%
11 0.1%
12 0.1%
average number of rounds = 10.60
minimum number of rounds = 9
maximum number of rounds = 12
average rating from best = 39.8
run4 'formats/FoySim' 2000 16 500 200 9999
1 35.3%
2 23.6%
3 15.4%
4 9.8%
5 6.3%
6 4.7%
7 2.2%
8 1.4%
9 0.6%
10 0.4%
11 0.3%
12 0.1%
13 0.1%
14 0.1%
average number of rounds = 10.59
minimum number of rounds = 9
maximum number of rounds = 12
average rating from best = 40.7
run4 'formats/FoySim' 2000 16 500 400 9999
1 33.4%
2 23.3%
3 15.7%
4 10.7%
5 7.5%
6 3.8%
7 2.9%
8 1.2%
9 0.8%
10 0.5%
11 0.3%
12 0.1%
13 0.1%
average number of rounds = 10.59
minimum number of rounds = 9
maximum number of rounds = 12
average rating from best = 42.7
|
|
I was also curious to know how this might work with something similar to our current championship and got the following:
Code:
run4 'formats/FoySim' 2000 33 1424 400 9999
1 38.0%
2 24.4%
3 17.2%
4 9.1%
5 4.9%
6 3.0%
7 1.7%
8 0.9%
9 0.5%
10 0.1%
11 0.1%
12 0.1%
average number of rounds = 12.23
minimum number of rounds = 10
maximum number of rounds = 14
average rating from best = 44.4
|
|
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 13th, 2011, 7:58pm by ocmiente » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
aaaa
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #958
Posts: 768
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #111 on: Jan 13th, 2011, 4:53pm » |
Quote Modify
|
How do people currently feel about the only partial banking of time? To me, it makes the time reserve of a player at a given moment somewhat arbitrary and unfair. I would like to see it become 100% again, not penalizing any player for any kind of time management, flexible or not, and only rely on the maximum move time limit not to bore any spectators.
Too bad this forum doesn't appear to support polls.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Adanac
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #892
Gender:
Posts: 635
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #112 on: Jan 13th, 2011, 7:29pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 13th, 2011, 4:53pm, aaaa wrote:How do people currently feel about the only partial banking of time? To me, it makes the time reserve of a player at a given moment somewhat arbitrary and unfair. I would like to see it become 100% again, not penalizing any player for any kind of time management, flexible or not, and only rely on the maximum move time limit not to bore any spectators.
Too bad this forum doesn't appear to support polls. |
|
I understand the rationale of making games spectator-friendly but I do sometimes wish we had more control over how to manage our time in a game. When there's a really critical move to be made in the WC, the maximum time is 4 or 5 minutes per move regardless of how much time has been banked. If I need to go over 5 minutes of thinking time for a single move, then it's probably a difficult decision in a complex position that can make or break the game -- I'd rather have the extra time and let the spectators wait and watch.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
ginrunner
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #5449
Gender:
Posts: 163
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #113 on: Jan 14th, 2011, 1:41am » |
Quote Modify
|
4 or 5 minutes for a move should be enough time though honestly. The majority of moves are made in less than a minute and so 5 times that should be enough. Yes, there are those times where you have a complex situation and you would use up the whole time but would an extra minute or more really give you enough time to actually change your mind? I know personally on those really complex moves I tend to see a move then try to figure out what is wrong with it. If there is something wrong I think of something new. I really doubt at minute 5 you would not already have something planned and been over it and its possible lines.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Adanac
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #892
Gender:
Posts: 635
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #114 on: Jan 14th, 2011, 11:06am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 14th, 2011, 1:41am, ginrunner wrote:| 4 or 5 minutes for a move should be enough time though honestly. The majority of moves are made in less than a minute and so 5 times that should be enough. Yes, there are those times where you have a complex situation and you would use up the whole time but would an extra minute or more really give you enough time to actually change your mind? I know personally on those really complex moves I tend to see a move then try to figure out what is wrong with it. If there is something wrong I think of something new. I really doubt at minute 5 you would not already have something planned and been over it and its possible lines. |
|
Chess players have been known to study a single move for over 1 hour in extreme cases, even when they only have a total of 2 hours available for the first 40 moves! I'm not saying that I would often look at a position for more than 5 minutes, but it would be nice to have the option if the position was really complex. And the peace of mind is a psychological bonus too. Once I've already thought for a few minutes and haven't found a move that I really like on a complicated board then I start to get paranoid about the ticking clock. If I've played quickly the whole game to build up my reserve time, it would be nice to be able to just sit back and really think through all the options without being rushed.
The other issue, that aaaa addressed originally, was about banking only 75% of unused time. That's never bothered me as much because I've always been able to bank a lot of extra time early in the game, despite having only partial credit for unused time.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
Fritzlein
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #706
Gender:
Posts: 5928
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #115 on: Jan 14th, 2011, 8:17pm » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 14th, 2011, 11:06am, Adanac wrote:| Chess players have been known to study a single move for over 1 hour in extreme cases, even when they only have a total of 2 hours available for the first 40 moves! |
|
...which is why watching chess is so frustrating, even when there is live commentary which should be keeping the game interesting. My experience chatting about live grandmaster games on ICC was typically the following: In the opening, no one has any time to explain what is going on, so we get about fifteen moves into the game with no sense of what might have happened instead, and no sense of what the struggle was about. Then the game screeches to a halt for twenty minutes while the guy who was taken out of book tries to figure out if he is in trouble or not. During this long think, people talk about the position for a few minutes, then have exhausted what they want to say and start rambling about other topics of general interest. I leave and get sandwich. At the second long think I go read the newspaper, and often forget to come back to the game at all.
For my enjoyment of Arimaa as a spectator, a commentator, and even for my enjoyment in playing against someone who manages his time unevenly, I am quite willing to give up my own privilege of having long thinks as an Arimaa player.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #116 on: Jan 16th, 2011, 1:16am » |
Quote Modify
|
on Jan 13th, 2011, 7:29pm, Adanac wrote:
I'd rather have the extra time and let the spectators wait and watch. |
|
I hope the Arimaa community does not follow Chess in this regards. What's good for the players is not always good for the spectators. Arimaa players and organizers must remember to keep the needs of the spectators in mind. Spectators have no voice in meetings where matters such as time controls are decided, but they do eventually vote with their wallets and feet. Without happy fans and spectators a sport is not sustainable; and it's the players who eventually lose out.
Also, I've always felt that players should think of the time controls as an extension of the game rules since it applies to both players equally. Of course different players will be better at different time controls. No matter what time control is picked for the event some player will come out winning. One can argue that slower time controls with greater flexibility for the player will allow higher quality games with less chances of losses due to time or blunders and I definitely agree with that. The time controls in WC type events should provide sufficient time for the players to think. However, it would be a mistake to think that spectators only want high quality games. The possibility that the players could make a mistake makes the game more interesting to watch.
Not that all this really matters that much right now, but maybe someday it will. It would be good if we just did it right from the beginning. So lets not disregard the needs of the spectators.
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 16th, 2011, 1:18am by omar » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
rbarreira
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #1621
Gender:
Posts: 605
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #117 on: Jan 16th, 2011, 1:41pm » |
Quote Modify
|
A compromise would be to have a fairly low reserve limit, but stop using a limit for each move. This way the total game time does not increase in any significant way, but a difficult move can be thought on for a bit longer.
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 16th, 2011, 1:43pm by rbarreira » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
omar
Forum Guru
Arimaa player #2
Gender:
Posts: 1003
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #118 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 7:50pm » |
Quote Modify
|
The round 2 games are over and I am about to pair the players for round 3. However, we have come across an issue which required the decision of the TD.
In round 1 Labadorboy forfeited the game against Nevermind and did not come back to request to continue the tournament. Thus, he has been dropped from the tournament and did not play in round 2.
When computing the Strength of Schedule for Nevermind after round 2 we need to decide what the contribution from Labadorboy will be from his performance in round 2. If we treat Labadorboy's absence as a lose then Nevermind would have a lower SoS than if we treat Labadorboy's absence as a draw. This difference in SoS would cause a difference in the pairing.
The tournament rules should have addressed how forfeits (drop outs) would effect the SoS calculations explicitly. However, we have never had this issue come up in previous years and so we had not thought of mentioning it in the rules.
Due to the urgency of the decision, I called the TD and asked for his decision on the matter. The TD decided that we should assume a draw for Labadorboy's performance in round 2 and future rounds. So I will pair round 3 based on this decision.
I will leave it up to the TD to explain the justification for his decision if he wishes to do so.
|
| « Last Edit: Jan 17th, 2011, 8:15pm by omar » |
IP Logged |
|
|
|
99of9
Forum Guru
Gnobby's creator (player #314)
 
Gender:
Posts: 1413
|
|
Re: 2011 World Championship
« Reply #119 on: Jan 17th, 2011, 9:26pm » |
Quote Modify
|
I just found out that I need to speak in defense of having the preliminary structure we have at the moment.
I think the preliminary is great, and am strongly against dropping it. A unified elimination tournament means you have to treat every game extremely seriously, which is difficult to sustain for many rounds. I like the fact that preliminary losses get wiped when the serious action starts. For example, if Fritz's timeout in round one had counted, would you really want to see that dragging him down if it comes down to a head to head shootout with Jean?
P.S. A nice side benefit is that weaker players still get plenty of competition experience without an early knockout.
|
|
IP Logged |
|
|
|
|
Home
Help
Search
Members
Login
Register
Reply
Notify of replies
Send Topic
Print