Chimp Challenge 2012 rules discussion thread

[Dead Things]

Originally Posted by stoanee

think we should DEFINITELY have a competition with NCIX. How about the right to display the "Ammolite Beaver?"

As an aside - I, for one, am really quite fond of this idea. Make it a completely separate event - perhaps at a time when folding starts to ramp up here in Canada, say October or November. We should totally do this... sounds like an awful lot of fun!

[Tim_H]

I'll second that!!

[Inik]

Originally Posted by Dead Things

As an aside - I, for one, am really quite fond of this idea. Make it a completely separate event - perhaps at a time when folding starts to ramp up here in Canada, say October or November. We should totally do this... sounds like an awful lot of fun!

That would be nice! It's better than May when it's getting hotter!

[Rison]

Having an HWC vs NCIX would be fun.

Also, having 'the world' against HPCS would be fun also. (I really freaking like that idea) or take on the IBM supercomputer Watson!

Having anything to do with a skewed competition that will never be a fair race? with a bunch of people who will whine, bitch and complain? = not fun. Good luck to those who take part, I can't be bothered to switch my few systems I have left over.

[BrainEater]

Yep HWC vs NCIX would be good.

....But thats canadawars.....NOT Chimp Challenge.

I have more bad news too : Folding @ home is not designed for massively paralell machines a.k.a. 'supercomputers' , so thats out , it won't run.

....and going against hpcs is no fun....It's 500 of exactly the same machine , and we know thier output is 10 times what our is.

------------------

Back to the discussion.

We're the underdog winner from last year.Personally , I don't think HWC should be involved in any way with the rules.We can organize / help /etc , but I think the winner should have no vote on the rules.

That way , when we win again defending our title , we can say "Cram it up your ass" when people whine.

But I digress.

I think we need to ask eVGA what they think the rules should be , making it fair for everyone.

And I think we should involve [H]ocp too......I doesnt seem right having a chimp challenge without em.

I know they've sworn it off , but If we ( all teams) could come up a decent guidline/ruleset , mebbie they'd be in.

Food for thought.

[stoanee]

Originally Posted by BrainEater

Back to the discussion. We're the underdog winner from last year. Personally , I don't think HWC should be involved in any way with the rules.We can organize / help /etc , but I think the winner should have no vote on the rules.

That way , when we win again defending our title , we can say "Cram it up your ass" when people whine.

I'll drink to that!

Originally Posted by BrainEater

But I digress.

I think we need to ask eVGA what they think the rules should be , making it fair for everyone.

And I think we should involve [H]ocp too......I doesnt seem right having a chimp challenge without em.

I know they've sworn it off , but If we (all teams) could come up a decent guidline/ruleset, mebbie they'd be in.

Food for thought.

Judging by their forum feedback, EVGA is brainstorming rule ideas so they would be a good pick to lay some down. They look like they are ready to rumble too.

[Shredder]

The CC was a good time last year, its great to see it back.
Maybe the pre-challenge averages could be obtained from the period 2 months after the last challenge to January 1 to filter out the drive-by points brought in by HPCS,prizes, team alliances ect.
The competion should set the major rules of engagment, they are challenging the HWC's for the title.
In the end the challenge is for the title ,the gain is for man so its all good. Bring it on.

[stoanee]

An idea was raised in the EVGA forum that any averaging formula, if used, should come from the previous CC competition numbers. I think it is a more accurate reflection of each teams capabilities. One problem I see with that though, is if you do not at least match your previous output the averaging formula would work against you. ( f you did not see an overall gain you would not be competitive anyway though)

[BrainEater]

I don't agree with averaging formulae really , but I do realize it can be a valid method.

We ran 5 million points today.

In the last 2 chimp challenges we did , We maintained about a million ppd - year round.AKA a net gain of a million points.

We're actually above that now.

If the chimp challenge is about promoting the science and gaining new users , lets make it about that.

A points race for a short time is not what we want.

We want a users race.

-----------------

Here's what I suggest .

Chimp challenge 2012 gets cancelled.No one wins, no one gets anything.The title goes into stasis.

....but from may 5 2012 on , we track the users AND maintained PPD till may 5 2013 .

The team with the highest user gain/maintained PPD increase wins.

1 year gain total gets the jpeg.

[BrainEater]

Heh....

no comments eh ?

-----

Here's another suggestion .

If it's decided we want a points race , here's how you eliminate WU priming : Make it a soft, un-announced start time determined by a third party.

I also think any method of handicapping via averages needs to happen with pre-HPCS numbers , I'm not so sure that would affect all the teams uniformly.

----

Where or how are all the team captains meeting/communicating ? (just curious )