Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:02:11 07/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2001 at 03:15:48, José Carlos wrote: >On July 15, 2001 at 12:39:43, odell hall wrote: > >>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. > > Can you name one? You're offending programmers with that statement (at least, >I feel offended), so you'd better apologize. > > José C. I can name some programmers who clearly disagree with Hyatt. Amir and Vincent are the names that I remember now. I do not remember that they used the words "full of s--t" but it is clear that they did not find Hyatt's statements about Deep blue as something that is close to the truth. Uri
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.