Author: James T. Walker
Date: 19:17:15 09/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 1999 at 18:30:23, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On September 02, 1999 at 14:31:26, James T. Walker wrote: > >>>>game/60', 2 * Cyrix/IBM 6x86MX PR-300 >>>> >>>> 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >>>>1 Hiarcs 7.32 ½ 0 ½ 1 ½ 1 0 1 ½ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 13.0/17 >>>>2 CSTal II ½ 1 ½ 0 ½ 0 1 0 ½ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4.0/17 > >and nobody of you is irritated by these results. you really believe >cstal would be that much weaker than the last 10 games SHOW? >what you see is how the ssdf-guys have been betrayed over >the last 1 year by a company i don't want to name here. >i still stand to my word. >they have cheated and they continue their job. >and you will get these kind of faked data. >IF you allow them to play games with you this way. Hello Thorsten, You have mixed up the post. I did not post these scores. I was simply adding my post to the bottom (1 paragraph). My post was to Uri concerning playing CSTal-2 vs Crafty at 40/2hrs. By the way, the above scores are possible. I have seen the same thing happen with Fritz vs Hiarcs and there is very little difference in their actual strength. More games are needed. I'm also curious about your comments concerning the Chessbase auto232. You seem to think there is something wrong with the results when using it. I wonder which program it favors when Fritz is playing Hiarcs 7.32 or Junior is playing Nimzo99. Can you be specific ? Jim Walker
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.