Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 20:00:49 10/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2000 at 17:03:40, Uri Blass wrote:
>On October 15, 2000 at 15:21:34, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>>On October 15, 2000 at 11:59:53, Fernando Villegas wrote:
>>
>>>Dear Thorsten:
>>>Let me clear a couple of things:
>>>a) I am very calm about this issue. I am not a man to become irated by these
>>>things. Not for almost anything in fact, except noise and bad music.
>>
>>me too.
>>
>>>b) I was just registering the fact that you, in the very title of the post,
>>>announced we were not seeing anything.
>>
>>right. not many posts about gambit-tiger winning french championship
>>like hell.
>>still not many posts register that gambit-tiger plays dutch championship
>>like hell.
>>
>>
>>>c) I do not say tiger or whatever program is like sargon. I was just giving an
>>>example of how old certain techniques are and how speculative they were and are.
>>
>>good.
>>
>>>I am sure that Tiger is beyond comparison in terms of sophistication.
>>
>>aha.
>>
>>>d) I do not proyect nothing. I have no bad feelings of any kind about you. I do
>>>not judge your person, just I make a comment about just a sentence.
>>
>>right. but you seem to project something that is not there.
>>i do not attack whoever. only say: hey folks - look !
>>
>>
>>>e) I am not a beam counter. How could I be one if I scarcely understand what do
>>>you mean by that? I believe it is kind of derogatory terme invented by Chris W.
>>>or by you and maybe has an utility as a weapon, but not real value in serious
>>>discussion.
>>
>>words have meaning. bean-counters count too much.
>>they don't see chess as the target anymore, but POINTS.
>>but chess is about chess. and not about points.
>
>I do not agree that the program that you define as bean counters count too much.
>The opposite: they do not count enough positional advantage of king attack.
>
>GambitTiger is not a slow searcher.
>There is no big difference between the number of nps of GambitTiger and Crafty.
>Chris w believed that you need a slow searcher in order to have big king safety
>evaluation.
>Chris w believed that the programmer needs to be a strong player in order to
>teach programs about big king attack evaluations.
>
>GambitTiger only proves that Chris w was wrong.
>
>Uri
OK, so let me clarify what is my opinion about this.
I don't think that my work has much to do with Chris Whittington's work.
I have been following a different path, and I have a different philosophy.
However, and to my big surprise, I have discovered AFTER having discovered some
principles by myself, what Whittington tried to tell us some time ago.
Now I understand some of his views.
Now I can understand things from his point of view (partially at least, I'm not
in his shoes and I have no contact with his psychoanalyst).
I have never appreciated the way CW behaved on this board, or on some other
places. I have never been able, for example, to have a serious discussion with
him. He was all the time diverting to provocations and philosophic polemics.
And now, guess what?
I have to defend ideas that he has been (very poorly BTW) defending himself.
Against what he calls "Hyatt's language and ideology" for example.
I'm pretty sure he is reading CCC from time to time. He must be laughing loud
behind his computer right now.
I find it really funny myself...
Christophe
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.