Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 10:39:58 06/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 12, 2000 at 10:04:36, Albert Silver wrote: >On June 11, 2000 at 15:40:23, Hans Gerber wrote: > > > >>>> >>>>'The winner program of Paderborn' it is announced. >>>> >>>>In Paderborn it was not the version SHREDDER 3, but a newer one, probably >>>>version number 4. That World Champion version is sold for 7 US$ right now. >>> >>>Not necessarily. If I buy a recent version of Fritz and it states that it was >>>World Microcomputer Champion in 1995, that doesn't necessarily mean that the >>>engine in it is the one that won that World Championship. >>> >>> Albert Silver >> >> >>Not necessarily? >> >>Ok then. Let me tell you what the cover is telling you. >> >>1. Karpov: "A great program and justified Computer World Champion!" >> >>2. Headline: "World Champion The Computer World Champion of all classes" >> >>3. Stamped on the front in red: "Very good. Testresult in Computerschach+Spiele >>in Febuary 2000" >> >>4. Further on the front cover: "Thze talking program comments your game with the >>original voice of Anatoly Karpov" >> >>5. Gold Medal on the front cover repeating "Computer Chess World Champion 1999" >> >>6. Now the back cover: "The program of the young Stefan Meyer-Kahlen from >>Dortmund triumphed in June 1999 on a usual Pentium PC against the whole >>multiprocessors and Big Machines and became unbeaten Computerchess World >>Champion of all classes." >> >>7. As example of the list of features: "Beginner, Blitz and Tournament levels, >>Solutions for Mate problems. For beginners and experts, up until Grandmaster." >> >> >>Do you still think that this should indicate that it is a very old, almost antic >>program that already has been updated many times since the time of its origin >>success? >> >> >> >>Hans Gerber > >As for the characteristics, I cannot say, but truly, it seems as if the program >in question isn't Shredder 3. This was not the point. Remember that the winning version in 1999 was something above version 3. So I understand that it is version 4. But this is neither the question. the exact number of the version was not the main point for my question. The main question was why a Champion (of June 1999!) is sold for 7 US$. Then Meyer-Kahlen came and confirmed that it is not closely one of the actual versions. For me this is a very important statement. Perhaps it was too difficult to understand. The 7- dollar- program is presented as the Championship version (!) of the program by S. M.-K.. That is the point. No matter if you think it's not 3 or M.-K. confirms it is not one of the (good) complete versions, M.-K. did not play with a slim version of his program to win the championship. The superficiality of such discussions is telling. My last debate was about the Deep Blue match and who was to blame for the bad climate between the two parties. If you isolate parts of a question you might succeed in finding quick answers but you can not find the truth. In a way the impossibility to find the truth allows a strong verdict against a certain party. If you are familiar with science and its reasoning this is all but totally new information. In our actual debate the point is that Stefan Meyer-Kahlen is responsible (since his name is figuring on the box and CD with the name of hcc) for a situation where his "championship (!) version" is sold for 7 dollars and he confirms without hesitation that the program is (of course) _not_ one of the complete good versions... In science we call it a contradiction. In science you can not simply produce contradictions without hurting your good name. Now the selling of a product is not science at all, but it still throws a bad light on you if you try to hide your responsibility for a market strategy (to omit to qualify the technique with the justified verdict) and run away with the money. Must I repeat that it is written on the box that this is the championship version that was playing on a "normal" PC? Of course the expert knows that this can not be true because all the endgame CDs are not in the box. Of course this, of course that. Hans Gerber > I presume you bought it for those miserable $7 >(said only half-jokingly as that really is very little) at Lidl. Does it say in >the manual or in the program itself the version of Shredder being played (I mean >numerically and not it's curriculum)? I know there are intermediate versions of >program running around. I have a friend who has an official boxed copy of Genius >3.5. Until I saw it, I had never even heard of a Genius 3.5. In any case, you >could also consider testing it on a few positions if the version number is >unclear and compare the results with others. For this you might check out a few >sites where they post the results of many program on varying software such as >Frank Quisinsky's site or Shep's site. I noticed that Brice Boissel gave Frank's >site a very large file with many results, but I haven't looked at it. > > Albert Silver > > >> >> >>>> >>>>So, my question is still open. Is that the indication for a successful program >>>>or the selling out of a not so ... program? >>>> >>>>Final question to Mr. Seifriz: how do you call that if there is no version >>>>number 5 out yet and the implication has been made that it is the actually >>>>strongest program (of S. M. K.)? More so if Anatoly Karpov is telling you that >>>>on the front cover... >>>> >>>> >>>>Hans Gerber
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.