Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:50:15 01/18/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2006 at 20:33:34, Graham Banks wrote: >On January 18, 2006 at 20:02:28, Albert Silver wrote: > >>On January 18, 2006 at 19:18:42, robert flesher wrote: >> >>>Thank-you for the observation, however, unless its a book loss which it is not I >>>think it is fair game. Although I understand that perhaps this can stastically >>>alter the final results, maybe not. I guess book learning would fix this issue, >>>it does give me some thinking to do, cheers. >> >>With all due respect, I think it simply invalidates the results. 1 game in 6 had >>the exact same opening? How can one possibly compare the strength of the engines >>in such a case? >> >> Albert > > > >Hi Albert, > >I don't think you'll find that Robert is the only person who tests like this and >he certainly won't be alone in thinking that it's fine, especially if learning >is activated. >Because I test with learning off and use generic books, I don't allow any >duplicate opening lines, that is the position at which the engines leave the >book. >There are those who criticise this also. Exactly. Well said. I see we have a problem. A problem for the loving fans of Rybka who dont want to see that messages say "Rybka lost in a match against XY..." It's like my problem to post my opinions in a minority of one against a majority and its mods who say "Rolf, please dont post such opinions, it does make the fans angry..." - This is somehow unbelievable. And please, Graham, dont tell me "But Rolf, I did never tell you this this way". I agree, but in that sense you did it. I still dont get your logic. Hundreds are posting in favor of Rybka and a single critic wants to say that nothing is proven yet. And this is hurting these hundreds? - Now someone is posting a defeat for Rybka and imediately someone comes and tells him that his data are meaningless or less worth because of disadvantage for Rybka because it still has not this or that? What's going on here, Graham? I was never and I will never be part of a mass hystery. No way. And as far as I understand what democracy means? It's the protection of the minority to speak freely its opinions. >To each his own, but as long as testing conditions and preferences are made >clear, members can make up their own minds about the usefulness or validity of >any testing. > >Regards, Graham.
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.