Author: KarinsDad
Date: 08:21:18 09/25/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 1999 at 09:22:24, Harald Faber wrote: >On September 25, 1999 at 08:53:40, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On September 25, 1999 at 05:36:15, Harald Faber wrote: >> >>>How comes that I expected this argument? >>>1) a program should play well on each hardware, especially well when playing >>>another opponent on same or even slower hardware >> >>you don't understand how programs are developed and tuned and tested. > >If this is meant that I do not adjust my hardware to special program requests, >yes. And especially not when YOU say "for accurate CSTal play, one needs at >least an AMD-K6-3-500 or K7-XXX". And I still doubt CSTal then can compete with >the other top programs, because, don't forget, the others get the speed profit >too. Except you want to try CSTal/K7-600 vs MCP/166MMX. :-) > >>>2) I bet that if I had 2 K6-3-400 and would play this match again, the result >>>would not differ much and again you would want a faster hardware. >> >>i am sure whenever YOU would test something you don't like, it would >>fail in your testings, yes. > >You are absolutely wrong. I really HOPED to see Tal win. But I cannot change >facts. > >>>Isn't it strange that you always find excuses when Tal loses, Don Quixote? >> >>i don't find excuses when it loses. i do find strangeness in your testing- >>environment. > >Now finally you really got mad. I did exactly what you asked for, except that I >am not that fool to buy 2 new PCs for $2000-$3000 to get Tal run on an >"accurate" machine. Your behaviour looks like Chessbase autoplayer. Absolutely >stupid. Harald, You have been a moderator before. You know better than this. This entire thread has been on of snipping at each other and that type of behavior should stop. You can disagree without the innuendos and the finger pointing. > >>Your way of handle losses of other programs against tal >>is comments that i am cheating, and when others have results pro tal >>you don't comment at all. so i don't see why your kind of REaction >>is with higher moral than mine , Homo Faber. > >Show me more results than a) your results and b) more than this posted 2-2 >against Hiarcs7.32 and don't forget to sum up the Tal losses like that 6-0 or my >7.5-2.5. > >>>And Patzers ALWAYS have excuses when they lose. >> >>now you speak about yourself ? > >I do not excuse a thing. You always excuse the losses. First it was the version. >Now it is the hardware although Tal used 50% faster hardware than the opponent. >I wonder what you'd have said if I had played on 2 K6-3-500, probably that I >should have used the K7 or P3 or any other senseless story. > >>>The only way to stop critics like me is to show me/us much better results or let >>>me/us reproduce better results. >> >>Others HAVE shown you better results. you don't react in words. you lose the >>power of speech in the moment the world produces data you don't like. > >There was none except in your dreams and in your tournaments. > >>and all the others here having posted good results and data ? > >All the others? I must be blind having overseen hundreds of posters with super >results. > >>>>it was not designed to play what YOU call "sound" sacs. >> >>>Then it plays like mad because what I call sound is an attacking sac which leds >>>to a win or if it was not really correct, leads to a draw. I do not need >>>incorrect sacs. >> >>And i don't need you. >>you are as senseless as an incorrect sac is. You too Thorsten. > >Typical for you. No more arguments so you go one step further onto the personal >level. Childish. And Harald. > >>people like you always complaining - testing in strange ways - cstal does not >>need you. better delete it from your harddisc. we will have to change >>the licence agreement of cstal3: people like harald should better not >>buy cstal. they are forbidden to buy it. we will make a command that erases >>the harddisc in the moment it recognized that it is harald. :-) > >You do not need to fear that I will buy another version of CST and complain >until more than 2 persons except you find out that Tal can compete with the top >programs. > >>>For YOU, yes, because I cannot show discrediting results anymore and you can >>>continue your false propaganda. >> >>i am not doing any propaganda. propaganda is what YOU do: posting things >>without having the hardware nor the software nor the knowledge nor the >>data to say something. it is YOU posting prejudice, not me. > >Of course, you are absolutely objective, posting only the few Tal wins and >hiding the losses. > >>I do have the hardware, the software and the data and have tested the programs >>long time before i post. > >Maybe you need such a long time to get 2 or 3 wins. :-) >And your hardware argument is absolutely rubbish. Would the two of you please stick to the data and not the accusations on each other. Reading your slams on each other every 2 weeks is starting to get old. Thanks, KarinsDad :(
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.