Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 16:43:23 04/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 27, 2000 at 18:57:37, John Coffey wrote: >O.K., just my 2 cents..... I'll see that and raise you 2 :o). >If someone had posted a subject like "Fritz wins match against Crafty" then >that seems to me to be objective science. But the way some posts are written, >it sounds almost like it has become too personal. The viewpoints expressed is without a doubt very personal, which isn't too bad if you're able to control your subjectivity. Unfortunately that isn't always the case. Expressions like "this proves" or "this shows" is used much too often in conclusions about a particular test. A test that might be flawed or incomparable to other tests. It would be better if results were put forth in the manner which you suggest. A lot of this has to do with the need for attention. I know that my attention gene is very influential, but at least I'm genetically excused :o). >The subject "Crafty not that strong" seems to me to immediately imply that Craft >is a weak program. Nothing could be further from the truth. We are >talking about the different between beating 99.99% of all players and 99.98%. >If Crafty is at all weaker than the comercial programs, then I am sure that >weakness is extremely subtle. Against human vs. computer competition or in >analysis, there is not likely to be much difference. Crafty is certainly very strong and certainly too strong for most active chess players. I and quite a few persons would like to see it become even stronger, which would include tests that exposes the possible weaknesses of the program. This makes useless tests and their wrong conclusions even more frustrating to read. That's my opinion. Best wishes... M.C. Larsen
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.