Author: Harald Faber
Date: 05:54:39 02/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2000 at 06:39:45, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On February 01, 2000 at 03:52:06, Harald Faber wrote: > >>However, Tiger is still not the superior program some betatesters wanted to make >>us believe... > >As far as I can tell, nobody wanted you to believe anything. Results were >results and Tiger's were very good in matches played by beta testers and by the >SSDF. That's why it topped the SSDF list, isn't it? It was not a ploy as you >make it sound. I didn't say Tiger is weak. I just wanted to stop this overwhelming hype. Tiger is not the new superstar as you and Thorsten wanted to show us. The exaggerating hype was much too loud, at least for me it was, and obviously not justified. >Four months have passed since the beta testers matches and new >programs arrived in the meantime. Still, Tiger is very strong, #2 at the SSDF >and not far at all from the top. >Enrique And not far behind are the competitiors, right? Again: Tiger is a strong program, no doubt. It certainly counts to the top 5 programs (you know that for me there is no best program, only a group of equal strong programs, followed by another group of strong programs which are not significantly weaker but a bit). But Tiger is NOT the new superstar which keeps all others under control. "Just" another top program, nothing more but also nothing less.
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.