Author: odell hall
Date: 09:39:43 07/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2001 at 10:57:47, Terry McCracken wrote: >On July 15, 2001 at 07:58:10, odell hall wrote: > >>Don't do what you did on the Van Diel Wiel match and Renig, you said if rebel >>beat Van Der Wiel then computers are GM's , But you back out. > >First Dr. Hyatt is away for a week. So he won't even see you message! Didn't you >read he was off for a holiday? No, I didn't , But I am sure he atleast took a laptop with him. > >Second, GM John van der Wiel played a very short match with Rebel Century, and >the first time he'd ever lost a match to computer, and that was by a mere point. Your Wrong it was by two points, but our of "respect" or Perhaps "Charity" Ed gave him a Draw by he was completley Lost. the score should have been 4-2, a Crush!! > >GM John van der Wiel is an excellent player but not a 2600+ GM, at least not at >present. Yet he could turn a second match with Rebel Century around I'm sure. >Not putting down Rebel, it's an excellent chess program, but not a World Class >GM 2600+, at least not yet!;) Because you are sure, doesn't mean that it is a Fact, it is Empty Speculation, the same as me saying Kasparov in a return match would beat Deepblue, that doesn't make it true, it is just a "belief" >Third, GM Huebner isn't a young man anymore, so I doubt he can play like he is! > I suspect you think he will lose so you are preparing an excuse before hand? You are a Good student of Dr. Hyatt i can see. But the Truth is Huebner is still extremely strong since he is Maintaining a 2600 elo, which is stronger than 99% of Grandmasters in America!!! Old doesn't neccecarily mean Weak, so whats your point? >Forth, do you know more than Professor Hyatt? Are you a programmer? Better yet >are you a GM?? Depends on what your referring to, I know alot more than Professor Hyatt in Certain Areas, as far as Computer Chess and the Strength of Programs it is an area that all of us are guessing at, but the evidence is pointing to the fact that computers are GM's, if Dr. Hyatt was as Smart as you think, he would believe the evidence that is before his eyes, instead of being an Arrogant Son of a Biscuit eater, for him it's more important not to be wrong, then to admit the truth. I don't respect people with this type of EGO. by the way I don't have to be a programmer to be right in what I am saying, all I have to do is look at the Evidence and ACCEPT IT. By the way, there are many programmers here who believe Hyatt is full of S--t. > >I don't know anything about you odell hall with the exception, you could show a >little more respect! Why should I respect someone who lies, because he doesn't want to look stupid, I don't use Crafty, so I have no reason to worship hyatt, he is simply an ordinary person to me. What should I respect about hyatt?? What has he accomplished that has you so obviously enthralled?? >As for the todays' game GM Huebner played Black and brought about a draw on move >23! Ok make sure you talk to me after the match, there are alot of games, but i would think that a 2400 player as your idol (Dr Hyatt)asserts computers are, would not even be able to accomplish a draw. > >So we'll see for fun how the rest of the very short match will go;) Myself, I >don't think tiny matches such as these have any great value in determining >whether a program has reached the GM level, only that these programs can give a >GM a good fight, and may win from time to time. > >Give both technology and programming another 5 years and I believe by then we'll >have _solid_ GM 2600+ chess playing monsters! > >Terry Terry I don't know you and have nothing against you, but you should put no MAN, on the pedestal that you put hyatt, think for yourself, act for yourself, grow up, use your eyes, your mind, your sight! "My people have ears to hear but they hear not, eyes to see but they see not" (quote from the bible)
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.