Author: Keith Evans
Date: 21:00:03 06/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 2003 at 02:33:51, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On June 15, 2003 at 23:33:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On June 15, 2003 at 05:29:17, Robin Smith wrote: >> >>>On June 14, 2003 at 18:00:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On June 13, 2003 at 12:03:58, Michael Vox wrote: >>>> >>>>>http://www.clubkasparov.ru/521772350.html?462691585533321 >>>>> >>>>>One could argue chess endgame tablebases play the endgame like god, but not this >>>>>article.... >>>>> >>>>>Enjoy :) >>>> >>>> >>>>The author is an idiot. >> >>> >>>Why exactly is GM Shipov an idiot? >> >>Read my next statement below. >> >> >>> >>>>a 5 piece endgame _counts_ the two kings. He is not counting them. >>> >>>In which position is he not counting them?? >>> >>>>He really thinks he is probing what we would call a 7 piece ending, which >>>>is _years_ away from reality. >>> >>>Which position??? The only 7 piece ending I saw was position #2, but in that >>>position GM Shipov does not mention tablebases. >> >>He mentioned it in the first two if I read correctly, yet _neither_ were >>5 pieces on the board. > >I find nothing wrong with what the author writes about the first 2 positions. > >> >> >>> >>>I think people on this message board need to tone down the "so-and-so is an >>>idiot" talk, especially since it often turns out the authors of such name >>>calling are making errors of their own. >>> >> >> >>I think his statements stand as written, and are wrong. The tables play >>_perfectly_. With _no_ exceptions. Saying anything else is idiotic... Weren't there some problems found with the Thompson tablebases? I know that recently there were bugs found in the Chessmaster 9000 tablebases.
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.