Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 13:43:17 03/26/98
Go up one level in this thread
On March 25, 1998 at 20:12:47, Dirk Frickenschmidt wrote: >Now your interpretation showed me that you still hope for some kind of >magical reason in form of a mysterious book as explanation for the >Fritz5 SSDF rating. :-) Right. I am collecting DATA in the moment that PROOFS that the results of the autoplayer are mysterious, indeed. My fritz plays still bad. But the reason is clear, I don't have the SPECIAL Fritz 5 . >Not much indeed: >a) shurely no more pure allegations of the completely unsound Ossi >Weiner kind. Pah. I have an own opinion. I am not a friend of Ossi Weiner. I fought against HIS opinion for years and whenever we meet us we have NICE arguments about accuracy-chess contra speculative-chess. Don't make my statements UNSOUND just because Ossi Weiner has similar statments. That is not under my control. >b) All we need is the simple question to Matthias Wuellenweber, soon as >he is back from his journey: did they send something else than the well >known powerbook to the SSDF. And he will simply anwer the question. Right. Very simple. Mr Malboro is asked: is smoking dangerous, and when Mr Malboro comes back he will answer: sure smoking is NOT dangerous. And we believe it. Very simple indeed Dirk. :-) The LINES (of Aufsess) ARE different from YOUR powerbooks. Wasn't this EXACTLY Y O U R O W N point ?? And now you need evidence by asking another person ?? I don't see a logic into this. Isn't the data talking enough for itself ? WHEN it is common practise of ChessBase to give an operator a SPECIAL book, why shouldn't they do the same preaparations for ssdf -list ? >I fear I have to disappoint your needs before that, having heard that >Matthias already answered this question with a simple "No". > >I propose you could just ask him yourself soon as he is back again. I don't know that he is away. I don't talk about this because i think he is not there. I only laughed about what was said about Fritz-book in Aufsess by Karsten. >You are right: It really is not surprising at all to test book versions >during such tournaments. I'm only curious what *kind* of book this in my >eyes rather weak one has been... To test book versions during tournaments ??!!?? Sorry, I have never changed book-versions during tournaments. I don't know what you are talking about. Sorry. >>Your whole live you have never ever any evidence. > >My whole life is full of evidence of any kind as well as of non-evident >things. >Apodictic sentences like this above are nonsense by definition. Sorry. I don't think so. You don't have ANY evidence ! You only BELIEVE you have EVIDENCE , in fact much of what you call evidence is a fata-morgana. People rationalize many decisions they have made with feelings with facts and logical explanations afterwards. But this rationalizing only hides that we life in a world without evidence. Do you have evidence that your wife loves you ? Do you have evidence that your children are yours ? Do you have evidence that your GOD exists ? Do you have evidence that you are your mothers son ? Many many many things in our live are completely the opposite of EVIDENCE and proof. And telling this in reality is maybe not very wise (Because it is obvious) but not nonsense. Only materialist are unable to understand this. THEY do still believe that there are facts and things out there. You out yourself as such a materialist. :-) >>You all overestimate the degree of EVIDENCE in a normal human life. >No. >It just helps considerably to reduce or at least be able to critisize >the output of pure rumors and wrong allegations - among others... :-) In a normal talk with other people you run arround and measure FACTS and DATA and proof while the others drink their beer and chat arround ? You measure on your birthday while all others sit arround you ? YOu really do this ?!? I cannot believe this. When I am on a party - nobody really is interested in facts and measures them. I don't see a reason why you claim you do so. I don't think you do. >If Ossi Weiner or you had oberserved something strange like "in game x >of the published SSDF-games Fritz5 played something completely else than >I can find in its commercial book/powerbook", and then told us about >such real observations, then there would be an argument to discuss. The problem is not what fritz is playing and what MY fritz is also playing. I think Kaare Danielsen said very good that the main point is: WHAT is the SSDF-Fritz-book NOT playing what MY commercial fritz plays !! Because the one is a subgroup of the other you cannot proof anything strange. Kaare is right from my point of view. >Without that there is really *nothing* to discuss and even less to >allude to - >unless you are in business in the way Ossi Weiner is known for since >many years. :-) I am in no business. I am only telling my opinion. There is no campaign and no business. Although it is very funny. >I'm lucky to remember his kind of advertising and placing of welcome >opinions back to the times of the fights between Mr. Reckwitz from >Fidelity and him, *both* not showing too much of what I would call >sportsmanship then, but one of them handling it even more disgustful >than the other from my point of view. Decide for yourself, whom I may >think of... ;-) a) I would never play a KBNK-endgame against Mephisto machines like Reckwitz did. I would never attack a person like Reckwitz did or was it Ossi. b) Reckwitz is dead. Please let the people be dead without talking about them negatively. I find anything Ossi is doing very funny and I remember it very long and can laugh after years. I will never forget how I told him that his Genius will lose the game against CSTal. I knew he would lose a) because we had so many games played in preparation for the 1995 championship b) CSTal won with no matter which opening was chosen. THE ENGINE itself was an anti-Genius killer engine, so Genius had no chance. I remember very good how Ossi talked and what he said. It still amuses me. >Just to put it clear: >I don't mind if you try to find out the truth you are searching for: >this is always the best thing to do and I am on your side if you do this >- no matter what comes out for Fritz5 or any other chess program. I have some happy hours !! Let me get my pleasure !! There are good times where you can laugh and bad times where there is nothing to laugh. In the moment I can still laugh !! >But this will only work based on evidence (which you consider not so >important), EVIDENCE is a word Dirk. I don't want to discuss with you about philosophy. I have read and discussed a lot of times about WHAT IS REAL and how the outer world works and how the brain INTERPRETS the outer world and and and. I have read all my philosophers and don't want to repeat the whole mess. Evidence is a word dirk. You believe it is a word that makes sense. I do believe people believing Tarrasch like in those words only self-betray themselves and their friends. There is no evidence. >nothing else... >You are no BLOED-Zeitung or rainbow press journalist, and I can hardly >imagine it will ever be your aim to turn into one... :-) As I told you, when I am with my good friends, and we have a party, nobody - and i hope you will also not do it - runs arround and measures EVIDENCE. or comes with facts and evidence, on paper and statistics while the others want to chat. >So let's just wait for the facts and interpret these instead of rumors. I am interpreting ! Thats in fact all you can do. interpretation instead of proof. Opinions instead of evidence. >By the way: I will not be able to read your no doubt heavy reply ;-) too >soon, because I will be offline until Easter Saturday. Heavy reply ? I am not tueschen !! Also you maybe oversaw the :-) smileys in my post. WHY ? I make them to show you that I laugh. Or smile. And you await a heavy answer ?!? > >Then we will exchange arguments and smileys again as much as you wish... > >Yours Dirk Right. Smileys and good feelings. But nobody runs arround and measures or searches for evidence. Tarrasch. I am surrounded by tarrasch-paranoids ! They all believe in accuracy and BEST-moves and 100 % evidence ! Tarrasch, God, Frickenschmidts, all materialists. How can Kirk beat Spock or the ship computer ?? How did he do this ? If Spock or the Enterprise ship-computer is so good, why was Kirk able to beat them ???!!! Because he used illogic emotional bluffs ?? Speculative 3D chess ?
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.