Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 10:40:34 05/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 10, 2000 at 12:41:03, blass uri wrote: >Chessfun found that the 11-9 result was bogus and that Fritz was slower in these >games. No, she repeated the test and excluded the 11-9 result. She even deleted the evaluation from one of the computers, thereby making a correct assessment impossible. I wonder why the games were deleted, but that's just another factor of uncertainty creeping in. >15-5 is not only the result of the 2 matches at the same time control but also >similiar to the results of other time control(there were results between 18-2 >and 13-7). You can't make direct comparison between timecontrols, it's simply not correct to do so. If you think it is, by all means do so, just don't tell me it proves anything. Again, try checking the Nunn tests at Chessfuns website. >Assuming that the 15-5 result is correct is the most logical assumption. If you assume that an assumption is correct, you are practically guessing. That's not good argumentation, and not even remotely close to a fact or logic. >It is better to check all the games but I do not see a reason to assume that >something was wrong and if you have limited time to check it is logical to check >the extreme results and not the results in the middle. Ahh... but that's not good enough. The other results could easily be regarded as extreme from another point of view and therefore checkable. Since you claimed that you don't own Fritz, I doubt very much that you've checked any of the games regarding Fritz. Sincerely, Mogens
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.