Author: Pete Galati
Date: 02:05:07 04/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2000 at 02:37:13, Chessfun wrote: >On April 23, 2000 at 02:31:28, Pete Galati wrote: > >>On April 23, 2000 at 02:12:19, Chessfun wrote: > >>>>Third, Christophe was not being clear what he was asking "why" about. >>> >>>The question he asked is simple enough. You said these blitz times were >>>too fast and that they are too fast to judge the strength of a program. >>>He asked, why and can you explain. Since you had made these statements >>>you must have evidence that these statements are correct. >>>Seems simple to me. >> >>No, _you're_ asking that question, Christophe didn't, he wasn't clear what he >>was asking about. Blitz games don't allow a program to search deep enough, >>that's obvious enough that the question does not need to be asked. > >Cut and paste: > >Why? > >Can you please explain why? > >You must certainly have some evidence? > > > Christophe > >That looks clear enough to me and seems to be what I had wrote. >Certainly easy enough to see what he is asking. > >Thanks. No, you only cut & paste what Christophe said, and you didn't paste in what I said that he was responding to, which was as a matter of fact more than one single thought. And, take a look at what you pasted in there, read it line for line. It does not ask any specific question. _If_ he was asking why I didn't feel that blitz games were a good way to judge a program's strength, then he's welcome to ask that, but he didn't. He only asked "Why?" to a general group of things that I said, that's why I didn't answer "Why?" I asked him to clearify what he was asking. Pete
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.