Author: blass uri
Date: 22:22:21 05/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2000 at 23:52:29, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On May 11, 2000 at 23:04:43, Chessfun wrote: > >>Just that it was implied that I had no idea, when in fact I know >>the time control he used. > >Then there's nothing to worry about then. > >>I have had F6 since it came out, have read the manual and see no way >>for it to be turned off. OTOH if by default it is on where this saved >>learning goes I have no idea. I am curious and will email Mathias to see >>what he can tell me.....I will post his reply. >> >>I also sought out Jouni's post:108723 >>"I test with LG2000 (and other engines) with learn off always." > >Well done, this was the post I was referring to, even though I let him off the >hook regarding cross examination. > >>True you suggested it and I believe Pavel (not sure) then posted that >>it checked out ok. To which again I checked it and found it a problem >>which he then agreed with. > >Yes, which means... what? > >>True you never mentioned my Easter Tourney, but by your own post >>earlier today that was just a tourney. > >Just supplying another example to try and remove your suspicion about >persecution. > >>As far as the SSDF goes you say above you would be speculating about the SSDF >>and yet in another post in reply to my "I dare say not much difference >>between what I was doing and how the SSDF test." >> >>You wrote in post: >>http://site2936.dellhost.com/forums/1/message.shtml?109341 >>Which I never adressed till now :-) >> >>"Since the tests were so clinical, how come you haven't got _any_ >>comparable data whatsoever? Comparing your own test to the ones made by SSDF, >>reveals ignorance concerning the work effort invested by the members of the >>SSDF, >>which I find distasteful. Like your test, your sense of proportion needs to be >>calibrated correctly." >> >>And now you write: >>"Unfortunately they are not as forthcoming with information as you are >>regarding their tests" >>Does this also reveal your own ignorance of the work of the SSDF >>.... and do you find this equally distasteful?. > >No, it doesn't and I don't there's anything distatseful. On the data available I >don't see any reason to doubt the testing methods of SSDF, nor the majority of >the games played. I'll leave the critical questions to Uri, but there haven't >been that many obvious or unexplainable problems with the games posted AFAIK. I did not check most of the ssdf games. I have Junior5 so I could find that Junior5 did not use the right book but I did not check most of the data that the ssdf post here. In most of the cases I have not the right program to check and even if I have the right program I am too lazy to check all the moves. I believe that there are problems that I did not find. Uri
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.