Author: Tina Long
Date: 22:54:36 02/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 02, 2000 at 01:14:33, Chessfun wrote: >On February 02, 2000 at 01:03:26, Tina Long wrote: > >>On February 01, 2000 at 11:21:57, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On February 01, 2000 at 00:43:26, Christophe Theron wrote: >>> >>><lots snipped> >>> >>>>What do you say about Fritz6 followed several weeks after by Fritz6a, and >>>>Junior6 followed by Junior6a? >>> >>> >>>I for one opposed the SSDF testing of Rebel-Tiger prior to release. >>>And still believe that position is correct and would maintain it >>>relevant to any testing by the SSDF prior to the release of any program. >>> >>>In the case of F6, it was not being tested by the SSDF prior to >>>the release of the upgrade. This upgrade is also -NOT- F6a. F6a is >>>being used by Enrique but is -NOT- a released engine by Chessbase. >>>The only engines that exist (excluding Light) are Fritz 6 Old and Fritz 6. >>> >>>As for Junior it is true the SSDF were testing Junior 6 prior to the >>>release of the upgrade now referred to as Junior 6a. However at the point >>>they started testing, Junior 6 was available in the marketplace. And when >>>they switched to 6a that 6a patch was also made available to the marketplace. >>> >>>Thanks. >> >>I think they can test what they want when they want to. >>The fact that they publish their results is a bonus for us. >>They acknowledged that Tiger wasn't available yet, but they were so impressed >>with the engine they wanted to test it. >> >>I don't think they wanted to just look at the CDROM for many months without >>playing with it. >> >>SSDF have no Obligation to anybody or any program. They are a group of >>enthusiasts who practise their hobby. >> >>I hope they never get offended by all the critisism they get & start to withhold >>their results from the public. Although it would be quite just if they did. >> >>Onya SSDF >>Onya Amir and Shay >>Onya Junior6 >> >>Tina Long > > >Being oppossed to the testing of Rebel-Tiger prior to it's release, >is not what I would consider a critisism on the SSDF. As I recall >Bertil had posted what he thought they might test next and various >alternates were talked about as it was the first time for the K2-450's. >It is as I have stated before just MHO. In fact I don't read anything >I have said as a critisism of the SSDF. I am just one of the many who >look forward to going over the games played by them and appreciate all >the hard work and hours of dedication shown by all the testers. >Thanks. Yes, you are correct, I apologise, The first two paragraphs of my reply I think is fair comment to your post. The second two parapraphs were simply my standard 3 monthly critisism of SSDF critics and do not belong in a reply to you. Once I get started.... Cheers, Tina
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.