Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:39:10 11/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2000 at 14:48:23, David Beauregard wrote: >On November 05, 2000 at 09:51:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 05, 2000 at 00:52:34, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >>>On November 03, 2000 at 10:39:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On November 03, 2000 at 00:18:40, David Beauregard wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 02, 2000 at 22:28:50, pavel wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 02, 2000 at 15:07:48, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 02, 2000 at 05:07:36, Jerry wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why waste your time with crafty or scrappy??? >>>>>>>>Singacrafty is the same program and will play ALL other programs... >>>>>>>>You can see craftys true rating there, not the over rated rank achieved by >>>>>>>>noplaying those with better programs... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Good Luck on ICC...LeTiger is a tough opponent >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You say I noplay those with better programs. I challenge you to prove >>>>>>>that statement. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> attakinski cmslim criollo dini egghead FireViper >>>>>>> GODMODE gzk inmortal Kurios Mr-Matt Pietari >>>>>>> BarkingCow comp CUP98 EA6PZ eivissa Gatling >>>>>>> Good-Boy HangerOn Jack-Daniels Masterchess muhaha >>>>>>> twixer brut ComputerMan Dementia Eatman ET2000 >>>>>>> Ghostn Gregorio HUGES jason-1 MasterMarc Mungo >>>>>>> Wild5Crafy CARobot CraftyCrafty DesX Ebbi Eza >>>>>>> GmSuperSoffer grouchy ibrax JJcool MateGoD MysticWarrior >>>>>>> >>>>>>>That is the _total_ noplay list for crafty at the present moment. You can >>>>>>>verify this with an ICC admin if you want. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Now exactly which "top programs" have I noplayed? Most of those are computer >>>>>>>cheaters and crafty users. Only a very few are there for violating my finger >>>>>>>notes. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>your turn. Maybe to offer facts rather than incorrect speculation? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>where is 'letiger' in your list? >>>>>> >>>>>>Pavel >>>>> >>>>>Bob, how about the following list of top programs you have no played including >>>>>LeTiger who is still censored and noplayed. The following are top programs you >>>>>have no played for what reason I do not know but here they are Mr. Hyatt. >>>>> >>>>>LeTiger, Good-Boy, CARobot, Gregorio, EA6PZ, Egghead, mystic warrior. These >>>>>programs are top programs and can win and would win their fair share against >>>>>Crafty if you would not hide behind your noplay and censor rules. >>>>> >>>>>LeTiger >>>> >>>> >>>>OK... feel free to do what you want. That attitude does not earn my >>>>admiration. I don't "hide behind" anything. I simply choose to noplay >>>>folks that think they don't have to follow my rules. >>>> >>>>If you don't like my policies, all I can say is "tough". If you want to >>>>say I hide behind my policies, fine. But don't come up with this nonsense >>>>of hiding behind my noplay and censor list. I now remember why I censored >>>>you in the first place. Hint: it has to do with "attitude". I don't feel >>>>obligated to put up with nonsense. >>>> >>>>You have been un-noplayed for days. However, I don't care whether we play >>>>again or not. There are _plenty_ of tiger operators on ICC that are a bit >>>>less arrogant, and a lot more polite. I'll stick with them. >>> >>>What did he do? >>> >>>I know that I have had some trouble with operators and put them on my noplay >>>list, but I can't remember why, in most cases. In a few cases I actually took >>>notes, but now I can't find the notes. >>> >>>I've been running on Otter recently and I don't think that has much of a noplay >>>list at all, so it has been playing some of the guys who are on your noplay >>>list. >>> >>>So far, no problems. >>> >>>I don't know why you need to worry about these guys. If you want to get the >>>games, but don't want the attitude, you can add something to your interface that >>>deletes tells from them, as well as draw requests, requests for aborts, >>>adjournments, kibitzes, and takebacks. That lets you censor them while still >>>allowing them to play. At that point they become perfect opponents. >> >>The problem is that I don't want a huge number of games vs one single >>program, which is where the 4 game limit came from. Prior to automatic >>interfaces for commercial programs, it was rare to play 4 games in a row, >>but once automatic interfaces were developed, it became common. He was >>noplayed by my interface for playing well over 4 games in a row. Usually >>when this happens, the operator will say "sorry, I missed your notes, it >>won't happen again" and I remove them. In this case, I simply received more >>abuse about "hiding" which hardly encourages me to remove anything at all. >> >> >> >> >>> >>>You have a whole bunch of people who want to fight with you simultaneously. I >>>would find it hard to manage this many fights, personally. At some point it has >>>to become impossible to manage. >>> >>>bruce >> >> >>There is little to manage. Other than the occasional complaint here. > >Bob, I thought we had buried this issue. The problem came in that I did not >play you four games in a row but that bounty hunter and other tigers, which I >did not finger on, had already played the four games. I was the fifth game. >Since going thru everybodies finger notes is a little tedious to see if they are >playing tigers and now a lot of operators are playing multiple engines. >I hope this puts to rest once and for all this issue and that LeTiger and Crafty >can play once in a while. Thanks. David Beauregard Note that not all of this is addressed to you. This has come up before. And as Bruce mentioned, it will come up again. Just think about this: Crafty/ICC is my _only_ methodology for testing program changes. I don't run multiple machines in my office, autoplaying other programs 24 hours a day. I depend on that testing methodology completely. And for that reason, I want a variety of opponents, including (mainly) human IM/GM players. I don't try to tell Ed or Christophe or Frans or any other program developer who he has to test against. I assume they are old enough and wise enough to know who they are most interested in testing against. That is all I ask for on ICC... the ability to play who/what/when I want to maximize my testing results. That is why I get particularly aggravated when someone starts in with the "you are just hiding your high rating behind your noplay list." If the people that said that would simply do a bit of research on ICC, using the history and search commands, they would find that this is actually the opposite of what I do. I don't hide from strong programs. I don't think I have anything to fear from _any_ program in fact. But I do want to prevent my testing from becoming biased when I only play (and tune for) one specific program. That is unhealthy in the max... You have to be _very_ careful when you read messages on a general message board like this. It is all too easy to conclude that all the remarks are addressed to you.. when in reality, they are frequently addressed to a group of people, since a 'group' is reading these posts...
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.