Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 13:18:47 04/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
>Absolutely biased ""reporting"". That is not *biased*, that is a conclusion you can agree or disagree with. There is _no_ evidence throughout the article that he is biased. He didn't know how Crafty would compete, so he tried it and he didn't like some features he saw. If you are biased, you should already *have* an opninion beforehand. Coming to a conclusion based on observation and data is *not biased*. A lot of people here start their computer, play 25 games and tell us: "Program X is weak". Because it ended last in *their* tournament. But *he* adds that, although that could be the judgement, it can not be a correct one altogether for his article, because of too little data - just look at the third tournament, he says. His major criticism on Crafty is that in *his* opionion the program plays unbalanced through the game. The lost nor the nearly won tournament can alter his opinion and observation that Crafty plays unbalanced if compared with top commercials. Feel free to *disagree* with that. You do. Don't think you have the freedom to call someone *biased*, because he drew conclusions on his observations. Even better: Turn it aroud. Basically De Gorter thinks Crafty belongs to the top guns; else he could have taken e.g. Comet, also a very strong freeware addition to Fritz. He didn't. His choice between Fritz, Junior and Shredder was Crafty. Jeroen ;-}
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.