Author: Albert Silver
Date: 12:27:58 08/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 27, 2000 at 11:25:34, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>Yes,
>
>I am sorry, but I like to be objective and hate people that are not.
>Anyway I have explain my point of view.
>
>Well, if you think that Shredder 5.0 won the games where it had some advantage
>or equal position (not considering the game against Fritz which played well) and
>did not loose the games where it was in trouble, what could you expect more by a
>chesse engine?
>Probably even Kasparov, after the book lines of my book, could not do more.
I greatly respect your efforts (I greatly enjoyed your gambit investigations
with Mchess books) as well as other book makers such as Noomen and Kure, but
such a statement is not only somewhat arrogant, it probably says something quite
different from what you intended.
For one thing, saying Kasparov is unlikely to do better than Shredder in those
openings can mean one of two things:
- Kasparov is incapable of improving sufficiently on Shredder's play in those
games in order to improve on the result, so they are of equivalent strength.
- The lines in question were so inflexible that the results obtained were
inevitable, in which case Shredder's credit for its results is reduced to nil,
as no one, not even the great Kasparov, could have changed the result.
I have no doubt the book you prepared, and are preparing, for Shredder is
nothing less than top notch, but to claim that it is the absolute best on the
one hand, and that you don't know the other books but your own, seems slightly
less than objective.
Please note that I am not criticizing your work, but merely object to a few
excessive comments. I don't know how well you know this forum, but here, all
such statements, particularly from professionals in the field of computer chess,
are usually taken apart and analyzed with a microscope so please don't take
offense. You don't often post here so many are interested in seeing what you
have to say, and if you feel you are the center of attention here, it is true,
but not for any negative reasons. This wears off with time, and I look forward
to seeing your contributions in the future.
Finally, a hearty congratulations on Shredder's victory, and your part in it.
Albert Silver
>This is why I think Shredder 5.0 is the best chess engine.
>If others think different, well I respect their opinion.
>
>Ciao
>
>Sandro
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.