Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 10:20:29 12/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
Robert, I think it is not the case to continuo. I will stay on my ideas as you are going to stay on yours. I am interested on winning games on the board and not in the forum. I am sorry, but I do trust more Darse than you, as well as the TD in Graz. I only hope that in future the programmers will agree to stop the games when the score is not lower than -10 to avoid "ridiculus". By being a chess player I find to continuo playing "extremely lost games" offensive and not useful at all to show how strong the chess programs have become. I am saying this here now to avoid someone would link this to Shredder games. I am a true chess and computer chess lover and hate to see non senses like playing extremely lost positions. How can a programmer be proud of not losing or winning a game extremely lost? Does it makes sense a statement like "well, this year my program did score very well as we scored 5 out of 8 while last year I scored 0. The first game it went down -12, but the opponent had a bug and we could win the game. The second one the opponent had a mate in 12, but a bug made the program lose 3 pieces and we won. The third game we won with 3 pieces less because the opponent program got a bug that removed all the hashtables use and so on..." Wow there is a lot to be proud! I am clearly exagerrating, but it seems for some people this would be acceptable... ??????????????????????? I will never understand this! Sandro
This page took 0.02 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.