Ron Nelson Ever Copied, Used , Cloned the Spracklen?

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
Post Reply
Mike Watters
Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:31 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
Contact:

Post by Mike Watters »

As you know Steve :wink: David Levy never programmed a chess computer. He sometimes developed algorithms that others used in programs, provided opening books that went into a number of machines and acted as program consultant sometimes, but never a complete chess computer program. He has said this himself in interviews.

When it says source of programs it means he commissioned programs from various programmers. Many of the best known from the 80s and 90s worked for or with him at one time or another.

In the later days of Fidelity (and Mephisto) CXG and its successor companies were doing much of the manufacturing in China and Levy was providing a proportion of the programs. It would be understandable if Excalibur continued those arrangements, whether adding further features in-house or taking the complete package off the shelf.
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

BTW, I wonder if the Samole family lost entirely his love for earning money with this specific endeavor or not. From Fidelity they created -from such burning ashes!- Excalibur and, who knows, tomorrow they can order something to that factory in China and begin a new company.
Men of business has also his personal loves and fads.....
...and then they will resurrect old Ron, maybe 89 years old by now or more, to produce another machine.

dreaming regards
Fern
Festina Lente
IanO
Member
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by IanO »

spacious_mind wrote:In keeping with this discussion, attached is a link to an interesting chess computer which is very appropriate:

http://www.spacious-mind.com/html/advan ... chess.html

Here are some dates:

Fidelity Phantom = 1988
Fidelity Phantom Chesster = 1991
Fidelity Phantom Chesster Eyeball = 1991
Fidelity Chesster = 1990
Fidelity Little Chesster V1 = 1991
Fidelity Little Chesster V2 = 1992
Saitek Advanced Talking Chess = 1996
Mephisto bought Fidelity in 1988
Morsch later uses Chesster as a name for PC chess software (why? he could have used a billion other names instead? Why Chesster?)
Steve mentions Nelson is proud of Voice and Motion Development.
Barnes mentioned he worked on Saitek Advanced Talking Chess.
Morsch worked for Mephisto around 1998 and Saitek?
Barnes is Morsch's in-house sidekick at Saitek?
Since 1988 Morsch & Nelson and Barnes must have worked for the owner?

So questions.......

1) Did Morsch assist Nelson on Chesster?
2) Did Barnes assist Nelson on Chesster?
3) Did Nelson develop the motion detector for Eyeball Phantom while Morsch or Morsch/Barnes work on the Voice (afterall someone had to, the program also came out as Kishon Chesster in German and that would not be Nelson (not aware of him speaking German)).
4) Were all the Chesster's still Spracklen?
5) Who gets credit for Saitek Advanced Talking Chess? Maybe all of them? However, if the chess program was a Spracklen then it would remain even under Saitek Brand a Spracklen?
6) Strange that no one had heard of this computer until the last 3 or 4 years. It seems as if it was never officially released. Maybe it was a royalty problem that kept if from being sold?

Wow this makes your mind hurt, regards!
Some key points you need to look at regarding chess lineage are the processor and the UI (buttons, LCD panel). It is doubtful that any of the H8-based Excalibur models have the Spracklen program, since they were 6502 programs. This is one of the reasons we suspected the 12MHz H8 Grandmaster was a Gyula Horvath engine, since it is similar in strength (1845) to his other 10 MHz H8 products (CXG Sphinx models, 1800). I don't know which UI the GM, Igor and Ivan are most similar to.

All indications are that the Phantom and Chesster models were 6502 (or compatible) machines using the Par Excellence or Excellence programs.

You can't exclude Nelson for voice support on the Kishon simply because it was a different language; to the programmer, those are just data files. I've never heard of Saitek Advanced Talking Chess. I have no idea who would get the credit for that.
Steve B wrote:Ron Nelson told me personslly years ago that he was the only programmer for Excalibur
he programed every single one of their computers.
Grand! This puts the Grandmaster(= Igor = Ivan) as the strongest machine he ever programmed. Which was Excalibur's first product to take the leap to the H8 platform?
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

Returning to the Spracklen, they won a deserved fame as programmers that gave to his creatures a very good -for a computer of those years- grasp of endings.
It was not, with PE and some others, even older programs, just a matter to reach the ending and automatically win the game. No sir; the program knew how to mobilize his King, push pawns and do all that in such a manner as to crush you often in the middle of your awe.

I wonder if ever his last program, the one that lost to Lang, is still available in some dedicated unit. I believe it was, but no if it is...


Fern
Festina Lente
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

IanO wrote:
Steve B wrote:Ron Nelson told me personslly years ago that he was the only programmer for Excalibur
he programed every single one of their computers.
Grand! This puts the Grandmaster(= Igor = Ivan) as the strongest machine he ever programmed. Which was Excalibur's first product to take the leap to the H8 platform?
i could be wrong but i am fairly certain it was the GM
Actually i am a bit surprised that Nelson never produced a program stronger then 1800 Elo
but it was the mid-late 1990's and i guess the incentive was no longer there

The Very First But Not The Very Best Regards
Steve
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

IanO wrote:
Some key points you need to look at regarding chess lineage are the processor and the UI (buttons, LCD panel). It is doubtful that any of the H8-based Excalibur models have the Spracklen program, since they were 6502 programs. This is one of the reasons we suspected the 12MHz H8 Grandmaster was a Gyula Horvath engine, since it is similar in strength (1845) to his other 10 MHz H8 products (CXG Sphinx models, 1800). I don't know which UI the GM, Igor and Ivan are most similar to.

All indications are that the Phantom and Chesster models were 6502 (or compatible) machines using the Par Excellence or Excellence programs.

You can't exclude Nelson for voice support on the Kishon simply because it was a different language; to the programmer, those are just data files. I've never heard of Saitek Advanced Talking Chess. I have no idea who would get the credit for that.
Hi Ian,

Right, most probably GM, Igor and Ivan could be traced back to Gyula Horvath. At first I was tempted to just put him down at my site as the programmer, but then decided against it, as I plan someday to do some real extensive clone testing which hopefully will provide more insight. You would have to test the various play styles in all these computer including ponder off and that is quite a lot of work.

Of course it is possible that Ron Nelson did all the work on the Voice as well, but it is also possible that it was a team effort since definitely around the 1988 time frame Nelson and Morsch were working for the same boss. It still does not explain why if Chesster was Nelson's, Morsch would use the name Chesster instead for his future software releases? The whole point of Chesster was the educational voice aspect of the software not dissimilar to Fidelity Chesster releases in this respect. So why would he choose this name??

The Staitek Advanced Talking chess talks identically all the phrases of the Fidelity Chesster with the same annoying voice. Difference is it is faster at 8 Mhz but I think it has less RAM. Still I would guess it to be at least as strong as Fidelity Chesster or Phantom Chesster maybe a little stronger. I have played a couple of games with it against some other computers and it seems to play at the level I expect it to be. If Chesster was a Spracklen program which we all assume it was then this one is also a Spracklen. If Chesster was someone else's then this one would also be the same some one else's.

ps... it is not just Horvath that I consider as possible link to Excalibar but also possibly Kaare Danielsen. Both provided programs to CXG, which were highly configurable.

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

Fernando wrote:Returning to the Spracklen, they won a deserved fame as programmers that gave to his creatures a very good -for a computer of those years- grasp of endings.
It was not, with PE and some others, even older programs, just a matter to reach the ending and automatically win the game. No sir; the program knew how to mobilize his King, push pawns and do all that in such a manner as to crush you often in the middle of your awe.

I wonder if ever his last program, the one that lost to Lang, is still available in some dedicated unit. I believe it was, but no if it is...


Fern
The very last program they produced was for Saitek in the Sparc OSA module....
for use in their Leonardo/Galileo/Renaissance boards
it was considered a disappointment for them

more here:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sparc.htm

Maxed Out at Low 2200's Regards
Steve
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

Yes, it was a defeat, the last try for the Spr. and a failure compared with what Lang was getting by then.

No matter what...

always a faster gun fighter comes and kill you regards
Fern
Festina Lente
IanO
Member
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by IanO »

spacious_mind wrote:Hi Ian,

Right, most probably GM, Igor and Ivan could be traced back to Gyula Horvath. At first I was tempted to just put him down at my site as the programmer, but then decided against it, as I plan someday to do some real extensive clone testing which hopefully will provide more insight. You would have to test the various play styles in all these computer including ponder off and that is quite a lot of work.

ps... it is not just Horvath that I consider as possible link to Excalibar but also possibly Kaare Danielsen. Both provided programs to CXG, which were highly configurable.

Best regards
Last I heard, the consensus was not Horvath: the GM has a more tactical style than the typical Horvath engine. I guess we won't know for sure until someone reverse-engineers the ROMs of both and compares the raw search and evaluation code. Or unearths some Excalibur contracts in his name. In the meantime, I wonder if there are test suites that check for play style?

How about Igor and Ivan? Did their UI have have any similarities to Horvath machines?

Danielsen is doubtful. His last engines were for 8-bit 6800-type chips in the mid-80s.

Take care,

Ian
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

Ivan, which I have played a lot, remember me kind of CC8 refurbished and accelerated.
In other words, Nelson crop.
If style means, in this realm, a recognizable pattern of mistakes or silly moves, then we have here very similar styles, differences being Ivan commits less, see more, has more tactical acumen and so play better.
I am beginning to think SB is right from top to bottom and these are Nelson products enhanced by some extra knowledge and faster hardware.
Horvath, I have two of his programs and play radically different to any Excalibur product, exception made a re branded one that is made with a Horvath engine.

Who knows for certain...
This field has became fussy with so many hands that has tried something or Could do such a thing....
Festina Lente
Mike Watters
Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:31 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
Contact:

Post by Mike Watters »

[quote="Steve B]
The very last program they produced was for Saitek in the Sparc OSA module....
for use in their Leonardo/Galileo/Renaissance boards
it was considered a disappointment for them

more here:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sparc.htm

Maxed Out at Low 2200's Regards
Steve[/quote]

Yes and there are even doubts about how much of Sparc was Dan & Kathe Spracklen's work in the end. I have read that others were brought in by Saitek to help after the disappointing early results.
Mike Watters
Member
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 12:31 pm
Location: Milton Keynes
Contact:

Post by Mike Watters »

Steve B wrote: The very last program they produced was for Saitek in the Sparc OSA module....
for use in their Leonardo/Galileo/Renaissance boards
it was considered a disappointment for them

more here:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sparc.htm

Maxed Out at Low 2200's Regards
Steve
Yes and there are even doubts about how much of Sparc was Dan & Kathe Spracklen's work in the end. I have read that others were brought in by Saitek to help after the disappointing results.

As for Excalibur we know or strongly suspect that there are Excaliburs with Dave Kittinger programs, with Gyula Horvath programs, and with Mark Taylor programs. There are known clones of CXG machines, versions of other well known models, versions of Chinese generic offerings. All of which doesn't leave a lot.
Last edited by Mike Watters on Tue Jul 08, 2014 12:59 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Fernando
Admiral of the Fleet
Posts: 3059
Joined: Tue Jul 31, 2007 4:35 pm
Location: Santiago de Chile

Post by Fernando »

Mike Watters wrote:
Steve B wrote: The very last program they produced was for Saitek in the Sparc OSA module....
for use in their Leonardo/Galileo/Renaissance boards
it was considered a disappointment for them

more here:
http://www.schachcomputer.at/sparc.htm

Maxed Out at Low 2200's Regards
Steve
Yes and there are even doubts about how much of Sparc was Dan & Kathe Spracklen's work in the end. I have read that others were brought in by Saitek to help after the disappointing early results.

When years ago I begun a thread about how limited are the ideas of any creator in any field, how much they depend of one initial paradigm they develop until it exhaust himself, I was crucified by several programmers that in short time finished themselves retiring from the business due precisely to the fact they stopped to do real progress.

One shot regards
Fern
Festina Lente
IanO
Member
Posts: 162
Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:43 pm
Location: Portland, OR

Post by IanO »

IanO wrote:How about Igor and Ivan? Did their UI have have any similarities to Horvath machines?
Now I'm not even sure! There is one very noticeable UI similarity between Excalibur's GM/Ivan/Igor/Mirage and Horvath's Sphinx and Krypton machines: available levels. They have the exact same 100 levels, at least as documented on the wiki. The main difference in hardware specs seem to be 12MHz vs 10 MHz, which would give a little speed and tactical bump, and different opening book. Perhaps the Mirage at 10 MHz would be the closest equivalent.

The Igor and Krypton Regency cases even look the same!

Also, despite similar specs, the following Excalibur computers (Ivan II, Alexandra, Phantom Force) all got weaker and changed UI.

So maybe the GM is Horvath after all!
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 3999
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

IanO wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:Hi Ian,

Right, most probably GM, Igor and Ivan could be traced back to Gyula Horvath. At first I was tempted to just put him down at my site as the programmer, but then decided against it, as I plan someday to do some real extensive clone testing which hopefully will provide more insight. You would have to test the various play styles in all these computer including ponder off and that is quite a lot of work.

ps... it is not just Horvath that I consider as possible link to Excalibar but also possibly Kaare Danielsen. Both provided programs to CXG, which were highly configurable.

Best regards
Last I heard, the consensus was not Horvath: the GM has a more tactical style than the typical Horvath engine. I guess we won't know for sure until someone reverse-engineers the ROMs of both and compares the raw search and evaluation code. Or unearths some Excalibur contracts in his name. In the meantime, I wonder if there are test suites that check for play style?

How about Igor and Ivan? Did their UI have have any similarities to Horvath machines?

Danielsen is doubtful. His last engines were for 8-bit 6800-type chips in the mid-80s.

Take care,

Ian
I am going to test them all against some Human Grandmaster games pretty soon. It will be pretty revealing.
I played a while back some 2hr/40 games to see if Igor would come out on top because of the 12 Mhz. The Results were:

Excalibur Legend II - Excalibur Igor --- 2-2
Excalibur Legend II - Excalibur Ivan --- 1-1
Excalibur Legend II - Krypton Regency --- 1-1

Not really conclusive of anything but the games gave me the distinct feeling that I was playing the same computers.

Regarding Kaare Danielsen.... I don't mean compare to Igor/Ivan/GM.

Excalibur produced a bunch of LCD Computers which could be toned down versions of Horvarth, maybe Danielsen. Don't know until they get test someday.

At the moment I don't have time because I want to get my site finished first. I can't afford to be distracted.

Regards
Nick
Post Reply