Author: Reinhard Scharnagl
Date: 02:38:55 06/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 2003 at 23:14:59, Russell Reagan wrote: [...] >is a pity that someone would still favor shuffle chess...even after they were >priveledged enough to hear the gospel of Fischer Random Chess, as told by you. > >http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?298667 > >"The pity is that you still keep favorizing Shuffle Chess." > >How arrogant. It's a pity that you are so obsessed with something so meaningless One problem here is, that you are citing without the context. This statement has been a replique to Mike S. [http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?298652] : >>It's really a pity that you have chosen FRC and not Shuffle for your idea >>(because I think your intention fits to Shuffle as good as to FRC; it's is a >>very good approach to examine an engines general opening abilities). [...] >Whatever you do, please stop telling people that their opinion is wrong just >because it differs from your own opinion. There is no need fur such an unnecessary demand. In [http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?298685] I wrote: >>It always will remain also a decision of taste, to accept them or not. >>But having the choice between Fischer Random Chess or Shuffle Chess >>my well thought selection always will be FRC. So please stop that unfounded flaming against me. Reinhard
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.