Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:24:10 11/22/97
Go up one level in this thread
On November 22, 1997 at 14:51:51, Thorsten Czub wrote: >on November 21, 1997 at 19:51:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>just to liven things up, I believe I mentioned that I thought Shredder >>was >>"quite strong" and sparked a month-long debate a while back? :) > >Nice retry Bob ! :-) > >I have to agree with you. >Before paris I had the chance to see shredder2 play against several >opponents on my autoplayer. >I knew that Shredder is nearly 100-150 elo-points stronger than >shredder1. >I was unable to tell you about because we don't wanted "to warn the >opponents". >So I was always the same opinion like you before the championship but >not able to speak because of championship preparation affairs. >On the other hand I knew about virtual2 chess strength for exactly the >same reason. > >Maybe this was one reason I always stressed the: BUT YOU DON'T HAVE THE >PROGRAMS point ... > >Please - not again this topic. We were both right. We both new that >shredder was strong, and you defended Stefan's shredder and I defended >Virtual. no arguments here. :) I always thought it was strong. I still do. Bruce is running it on ICC a lot, and it looks strong there. I can't really compare it to Crafty (it wins most games) because Shredder is running on Bruce's alpha and that is a hefty speed advantage. But even discounting the speed issue, it seems to play nice chess moves. >My defense of Virtual was that quite high because it was not so well >known that Virtual2 is so strong. Here in germany some programs have to >fight more to deserve the same HONOR other programs get without >fighting. >Virtual and Shredder are both in this categorie. that's where we differ, generally. I've done this a long time, and have a pretty good idea how all of the current programs play. There aren't many that I would consider pushovers any more, except perhaps a very few beginning amateur programs... But these are few and far between... >In the last edition of a famous computerchess magazine a writer wrote in >the editorial (that shows the point of view of the publishers) that >Shredder is not a good program. YOu can maybe feel wth Stefan, who read >this text in Paris, with the 2 publishers sitting in the same hall and >making nice small talk to him as if nothing has happened. >Sometimes life in unfair. I am pretty looking forward to the future >because these guys will now have to do a little turnarround AFTER >shredder has again showed that it is NOT that bad. >Why does this happen again and again ? >Why are some people making programs weaker, as if this would NOT often >influence the selling of these programs and maybe also the >live-existence of people ? this is always a problem... and it is too bad of course. But it is a fact of life we all have to live with. I saw similar comments comparing Cray Blitz and HiTech in 1986, before we went on to completely outplay Hitech and win the 1986 event. There are believers and non-believers in any type of competition I suppose... >Aren't they in charge ? >Can they write whatever they want - no matter if it is true or wrong ? > >I don't understand this. I am living in a fair hobby world. But some >people live in an unfair marketing/business world. I would like to see >the unfair people stack in their lager, and only to live with the >hobbyists. If this would somehow be possible. always been that way. Just look at the US. Apple suing Microsoft over windows stuff, Xerox taking them both on. DEC suing Intel. All because they steal from each other, lie about each other, and get caught every now and then...
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.