Author: James Robertson
Date: 21:21:35 03/30/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 2000 at 13:47:27, Christophe Theron wrote: >On March 30, 2000 at 10:41:29, James Robertson wrote: > >>On March 30, 2000 at 01:31:34, Christophe Theron wrote: > >(snip) > >>>That's IMO the ultimate difference between good amateur and good commercial >>>programs. Is it an offense to amateur programmers to say so? >> >>To say what you just said, no, not offensive at all. I think it is true that >>commercial programs are better, and that they often win on small >>insignificant-seeming details. But to say that amateur programs lose 9.5 to .5 >>because they can't mate KQ vs. K is not exactly realistic. IMHO. > > >I did not say that amateur programs lose 9.5 to 0.5 to commercial programs. I >just told a story of what can happen, and that actually happened to me. > >Why am I arguing with you? I'm sure you understand what I mean. Ok, maybe I read your original post wrong. My program is obviously amateur, I've put hundreds of hours of work into it, and it (I hope) plays a decent game against even the best commercial engines. I was quite disturbed to read what I misinterpreted as a downplaying of amateur engines efforts. :) James > >Forget that I am a "commercial". I feel like an amateur inside. > > > > Christophe
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.