Author: Tina Long
Date: 22:35:12 05/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 20, 2001 at 06:46:02, Graham Banks wrote:
>On May 20, 2001 at 03:02:17, stuart taylor wrote:
>
>>On May 19, 2001 at 23:08:41, Tina Long wrote:
>>
>>>Put up or shut up
>>
>>As I say, Alot has been put up, the whole time. I read this forum almost every
>>day. Please see my first post of this thread for details of what I'm refering
>>to.
>>S.Taylor
>
>I haven't seen a lot to back up your statement apart from the one sided Deep
>Fritz result(SSDF), yet I visit the forum every day also.
>Graham.
I Agree,
there has been no valid statistical evidence that CM8k is weaker than CM6k
(or CM6555). A little "chalk & cheese" comparison, and a lot of dependance on
CM6k's 2-0 over Junior5.
You people insult Johan de Koning, the Author of The King3 (the CM8k engine).
After more than 2 years work, he gave CM a new engine that's weaker than the
King2. He's a silly man isn't he.
Let me see a reasonable number of CM6k vs CM8k games.
Show me the results where, on comparable hardware, CM 6k has played
statistically significant matches against the same opponents.
And if CMx is rated say 2500 & CMy is rated say 2550, who's going to notice the
difference unless they're rated 2000 or more themselves - and then they'd be
using deep Fritz anyway.
Also, don't forget that the feature-packed, auto-playing, chess-training, CM8k
cost about 40% of the price of a Fritz or Rebel(with 3 engines), and about 25%
of the price of a Shredder or Genius.
So you've bought your cheap kids toy, & all you can do is winge about it.
CM6k beat me about 150-0, then
CM8k beat me about 200-0
I'm getting better, so .: CM8k must be better than CM6k.
Gees, got that off me chest
Hi guys,
Still kicking up a fuss at Sunny Mount Kembla
Tina Long
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.