Author: Christopher R. Dorr
Date: 08:00:10 07/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
Odell, you act as if this is some kind of 'bet' that Bob would be 'welching' on, and you can 'win'. Isn't this a bit silly? This is a discussion about how strong computers are. Nothing is riding on this, there are no odds in Vegas. Bob, as a clear and nearly-universally recognized expert in the field has stated his opinion. You have stated yours. Why is it so important that Bob agree with you on this? If computers *are* GM strength, then eventually the evidence will be totally incontrovertable. Bob isn't a zealot. If he believes the evidence supports that contention, he'll recognize that. Right now, he appears not to believe this. Why is it so important to you that he does this now? Exactly why is this whole matter so important to you? Is it so hard for you to recoignize that different people can hold differing, yet legitimate, opinions about this? Chris 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.
This page took 0.01 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.