Author: Bertil Eklund
Date: 09:46:43 04/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 14, 2000 at 10:57:27, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >On April 14, 2000 at 09:39:16, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >>On April 14, 2000 at 06:01:30, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >> >>>On April 13, 2000 at 17:21:26, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>>On April 13, 2000 at 13:37:13, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 12, 2000 at 21:56:06, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>>>>>I suspect that Millennium GmbH would have an extremely tough time winning in >>>>>>court against the SSDF if they did publish results for Genuis 6.5, WChess, etc. >>>>>>Nonetheless, it appears that they feel that bullying independent citizen groups >>>>>>is a successful marketing strategy. I can only shake my head. >>>>> >>>>>look : ssdf published results that are not played out on the base >>>>>of a fair competition. the results have been influenced by the autoplayer >>>>>device. >>>>> >>>>>millennium company has nothing against a fair competition. >>>>>if the ssdf e.g. would (as they have done over the years with the dedicated >>>>>machines) >>>>>test by hand, nobody would complain. >>>>>but they use the chessbase autoplayer device. >>>>>the results of this device differ from the device other companies use. >>>>>therefore the results are somehow irrelevant. >>>>>but the ssdf do nowhere print in their publications that their results >>>>>have been "arranged" or "generated" with the >>>>>chessbase autoplayer device which is not generally trusted by agreement >>>>>of all programmer paricipating in the list. >>>>>they do only publish numbers. stupid numbers. >>>>>i see no other way for millennium company to forbid to publish those silly >>>>>data, than threatening them. licence agreements in europe do count for swedish >>>>>people to. you can believe me. it might be different in US, but many things >>>>>are different in US. >>>>> >>>>>i would do exactly the same if it would be my product. >>>>>if somebody would publish lies about my girl-friend or lies about my >>>>>friends, he would get also similar kind of answer. >>>>>printing lies is not a fair way of competition and not a fair way >>>>>of an "independant organisation". >>>> >>>>Printing games and results of games is not printing lies. >>>>If the autoplayer of chessbase help chessbase then it is important to prove it >>>>but I saw no proof for it. >>>>The fact that you get different results may be because you do not use the same >>>>hardware and is not a proof that the autoplayer of chessbase helps chessbase. >>>> >>>>The ssdf guys tested shredder4 and sent all the games with logfiles to the >>>>programmer and stefan found no problem with the results. >>>>shredder4 is probably number 3 after Fritz and Junior. >>>> >>>>Stefan has no problem with printing the games and the results of shredder4 but >>>>the ssdf do not want to give information about shredder if they have not the >>>>right to print information about other programs of the millenium. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>I didn't get any log file. >>>Stefan >>Hi! >> >>You received the games in both pgn and cbv-format. Have you found anything >>strange in the games? >> >>Bertil > >Yes, I have received about 75 games of Shredder but haven't checked them yet. >Some programs really have improved during the last months so I am busy working >on Shredder. This is my main target right now, if I have some time left I'll >check the games but I don't expect any problems. > >I give you a recent example of some autoplayer problems. This is part of an >email I wrote today. I didn't want to publish it first but it might help here. > >"You know about the autoplayer and all of its weaknesses, just this morning I >had a strange behaviour again. I was playing vs. X when X send the save game >command to Shredder 3 times in a row. The result was that Shredder saved the >last game 3 times and adjusted the display of the match result according to >that. Well, Shredder won, so he got 3 points instead of 1 for the game :-) If >you don't look very carefully at all the games played with the autoplayer you >can get all sorts of wrong results." Hi! As I have told you and mr Weiner several times, we partly follows most games and check the results of every game. In example Tony Hedlund is a very good player and played in the last Swedish correspondence Championship, Bo Aurell another tester played in the Swedish Championship in the sixties and I think they can see if there are any anomalies. I don't know what persons that test your programs, are they only reporting the scorenumbers? I have now played 122 tournament games with S4 with only two stops, one game where Hiarcs stopped within the opening book and one game where S4 played only one move (1.d4) and saved the game as a win for itself, Nimzo saved it as an unexpected end. So far I can't see what the problem is. S4 has won against Hiarcs and Nimzo and looks to crush Tiger (my games). Only one bad loss against F6 a program that many people believe is the best for the moment. If we had been allowed to test S4 when it was new it had probably been number one for some time. I believe S4 belongs in the group of Junior6 and Tiger that fights for the second place. It looks like Fritz6a have made a big step forward and I believe it is the best program for the moment. I also think that we have been fair against S4 allowing it to use the Turbo-cds, that seems to be much more efficient than the original Thomson-CDs. Bertil >End of quote. >I have just changed the name of the program involved as I don't want to blame >anybody. > >Stefan
This page took 0.01 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.