Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:49:19 06/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 22, 2002 at 07:43:50, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 21, 2002 at 20:49:49, Omid David wrote: > >>On June 21, 2002 at 15:10:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On June 21, 2002 at 13:18:55, Randall Jouett wrote: >>> >>>>Howdy, GCP. >>>> >>>> >>>>On June 21, 2002 at 09:54:18, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 21, 2002 at 07:45:56, Robert Henry Durrett wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Is there anything at all about Quest which is different from the commercial >>>>>>version of Fritz 7? >>>>> >>>>>The idea is that if Quest/Fritz wins the tournament, ChessBase can say >>>>>Fritz won. If it loses, they will say it was Quest. >>>> >>>>OTOH, I guess you couldn't really blame them for doing this, I guess? >>>>(Shrug.) In other words, let's say that they decided to try some new, >>>>radical idea that might actually add 25-50 ELO points, but they're >>>>not really sure if things are going to work out in the long run. If >>>>Fritz would lose, its reputation would probably be tarnished by the >>>>ignorant public. Personally, I wouldn't wouldn't think this way, >>>>and I'm sure most of us who here would agree. OTOH, they're >>>>dealing with the general public here, and if Fritz placed 3rd out of >>>>the pack, then the public probably be all up in arms -- shouting from >>>>the rafters! -- that some other program bested the mighty Fritz. >>>> >>>> >>>>IMHO, I think should have entered the latest, greatest commerically-available >>>>Fritz and maybe an experimental version of the program, calling it >>>>something like thing "Fritz Experimental" or something. If the experimental >>>>version of the program fails to work out, then they really haven't lost >>>>all that much on their reputation. I mean, from what reading here, >>>>I'm sure that most people following the tournament are going to know >>>>(in the long run) that Quest is probably an experimental Fritz. Changing >>>>the name of the program from Fritz to Quest, IMHO, kind of makes them >>>>look guilty, as if they had something to hide. >>>> >>>> >>>>Best Regards, >>>> >>>>Randall >>> >>> >>>Call a spade a spade. It is a marketing ploy designed to mislead John Q. >>>public. Nothing more. Nothing less. It is a way to exploit success while >>>avoiding looking bad when the predictable bad result happens. >> >>I definitely agree. Such high profile tournaments are not meant for testing >>"radical ideas" at mentioned. Everyone comes with the best he has at the moment. > > >The decision if to gamble by a change that you have not enough time to test if >it is a good change is a decision of the programmer. > >I do not believe that everyone comes with the best he has at the moment. > >Uri Trying new ideas is fine. I do it all the time. The present Crafty on ICC is an example. However, I don't change the name, and play as "albatross" and then if it does well say "that is really crafty". using good results and hiding bad results, however, is a bit "out of touch" IMHO.
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.