Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 06:11:56 02/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 01, 2000 at 08:54:39, Harald Faber wrote: >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. OK. Next time we'll fake the results to make them look more modest. Enrique >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.