Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chessfun and Nunn1 Tests

Author: Chessfun

Date: 14:38:12 05/11/00

Go up one level in this thread


On May 11, 2000 at 06:58:10, Mogens Larsen wrote:

>On May 11, 2000 at 06:06:54, Chessfun wrote:
>
>>On May 11, 2000 at 05:01:25, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>>
>>>On May 11, 2000 at 01:10:51, Chessfun wrote:
>>
>>
>>Didn't you just cover this in the other post.
>>Well I guess this deserves a separate single post.?
>
>Maybe not, but you finally managed to answer the question.


Then maybe you should direct me to where this specific
question was asked of me prior to now.


>>Correct. The moves were and are within the evals.
>>But as can be seen it is posted as a question since I know something
>>is wrong. It is not possible to play Nunn at given time X then replay
>>the same way and get a difference of 15-5 - 9-11. So something must
>>be wrong but at that point I wasn't sure what and I assumed I would
>>receive suggestions as to what the problem could be.
>
>Sounds reasonable, except that it is possible to get very different results.
>Even though it is very unlikely to achieve such a difference.


Hmmm I thought that is what I said. You answer sounds like double
talk to me. I think you are saying you agree in a roundabout way.


>>The rerun proofed the score of the original score.
>
>This is my only problem so far. It doesn't prove anything, it suggests. Proving
>is something entirely different. It's not just semantics, or an attempt to
>instigate a quarrel.


You are correct....suggests is a better word to have used than proofed.


>>The moves in the 11-9 games were within F6 evals. But the depths of
>>those moves were not as deep as they should have been given the same
>>time for the move in analysis. This as stated elsewhere was discovered
>>by Uri as being the case for Crafty at 25/0. It was at that point that
>>this was discovered and since I have made no posts on the subject since
>>that time so there is no post where it is stated.
>
>Thank you, was it that difficult?


Difficult....Mogens if you ask reasonable questions without trying
to put me down then in return you will get reasonable answers.
If you ask a specific reasonable question you will get a specific
reasonable answer........amazing how that work huh.

See Mogens, even the tone of such a remark "Thank you, was it that
difficult?" sounds degrading and condescending. And appears IMO that
you do it with purpose.

When you say things as said to Uri in post:
http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/message.shtml?110101
I am only amazed that Uri would ever want any further communication
with you. I only quote this as an example as it seems you do it
in a lot of your posts when others happen to disagree with you.

Thanks.




This page took 0 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.