Author: Mark Young
Date: 00:58:48 07/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 22, 1998 at 01:40:52, blass uri wrote: > >On July 21, 1998 at 21:58:01, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>I guess these results show the difference >>of a program that does not know how to play chess (fritz5) >>in relation to a program that does know how to play chess (rebel10). > >If fritz5 does not know how to play chess how did it win the open tournament >in 25 minutes per game with 9.5 out of 11? >> >>Also it should teach us something about the relevance of ssdf-elo's. >>But - thats just the beginning. ... > >I can learn nothing about it because the following reasons: >1) anand could learn fritz5's weaknesses before the match and could not learn >Rebel10's weaknesses before the match > >2)the match with fritz5 was slower match 25 minutes per game and not 15 minutes >per game. > >Uri >> >> >>Thanks Ed. >> >>Sometimes QUALITY does appear without the effort of >>trying to emulate it via massive use of quantity. >> >>Pure quality, without any compromise !! >> >>Zandokan kann nach Hause gehen !! Vielleicht hat Kaspar noch einen Platz frei in >>der Gruft der lichtscheuen Geschöpfe ... :-)) Thorsten's logic about Fritz 5 has never made much sense. He has some kind of bias against Fritz 5, So when he talks about it he does not remember all the results the prove his point moot. Now how he can take Rebel's results and turn it around to show how bad and stupid Fritz 5 is at playing chess escapes me. But the fact that he tries proves his bias. Now if he want to try and argue that Rebel 10 may be better, then that's a point he could try to argue.
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.