Author: Uri Blass
Date: 18:01:41 07/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2005 at 20:38:04, Sune Fischer wrote: >On July 15, 2005 at 20:07:46, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 15, 2005 at 19:27:56, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On July 15, 2005 at 18:29:28, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>The time difference is really about 4:1 >>> >>>Yes but they use faster machines. >>> >>>Anyway the point is simply that what we call quality today is what we will call >>>crap in 3 years. Just like what we called quality 3 years ago is what we call >>>crap today. >>> >>>Am I the only one who can see how rediculous that is? >> >>In 1905 you would have been happy with a car that had a top speed of 25 MPH. >>Today you won't. To me, it is like saying, "There is no need to make that any >>more beautiful because it is already beautiful enough." > >I fear you're missing my point. >I want longer games too, but first and foremost I want enough games to make an >accurate rating list, without that we have nothing worth while anyway. > >And if that can be achieved by playing 2 or 4 times faster, than that is what >should be done. The target of games is not only to get accurate rating but to get data for better opening book. Games at longer time control have better moves so they are better candidates to include the moves of the winner in some opening book. Uri
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.