Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:20:46 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 09:06:42, Andrew Williams wrote: >Over the last month, there have been a number of such huge arguments. >I've always thought that it's a bit strange to get hung up on this >question. Five years ago, it was clear that the best micro programs >were not at GM strength. And presumably if you wait five years, PC >programs will have proven beyond any doubt that they are at GM strength. >Surely the time we happen to be living in is the best and most enjoyable, >because we're perhaps seeing a moment of transition between these positions. >Why then the need to convince anybody of anything when you can just sit >there and be proved right by waiting? Is there some particular benefit to >being able to say that PC programs are GMs *now*? > >Andrew I do not care if they are or they are not GM's. I do care what ELO strength they are. Why not determine what the strength is now? I made a statement 2 years ago about the strength on 500Mhz machines and was challenged to provide more than one game to prove my point. I did that. Why is it so important to wait 5 years? If it is not important to you. Great, don't read the posts, I ignore a lot of stuff on this board that is not important to me. :) Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.