Author: pavel
Date: 07:50:44 11/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
> >And pavel makes a mistake to try to get you to specify some match condition that >will solve everything once and for all. It's silly to make you jump through >hoops rather than just talking about what these game-analogies are supposed to >prove. > >Do you want to prove that Bob is stupid? That is kind of nasty and I don't >believe that that is what you are after, but if it is, that's probably won't be >very productive. > >Do you want to prove that Tiger is better than Crafty? One game won't prove >that so why even bother trying with one game? I wasnt looking for a solution, that will solve everything once and for all. I wasnt just getting the "point" of only testing with crafty, to prove the fact that GT is the result of a new "paradigm" (whatever!!) assuming, that thorsten is right and GT is a new paradigm, also, assuming that crafty is part of the "old paradigm", according to thorsten: crafty along with most top chess programs are part of old paradigm, exceptions are probably cstal, hiarcs, gandalf and few others. the group that includes all the programs of old paradigm is preety big, and crafty is a part of it(all assumption to make it easier), but crafty is certainly not the best of it !! now ,if you (Bruce) would like to prove a point as something as that, would you try a program that is in the middle of the group (crafty) or would you rather go for the best? (junior6a, fritz6a?) whats the "point" of proving the fact that a 'commercially extablished(?), strong program' is better than a 'freeware engine' ? winning fine games against crafty wont prove that it is part of the new paradigm. if you (thorsten) wanna prove it , you BETTER prove it. Dont give stupid examples. as for playing without opening book, do you (bruce) really believe all programs plays equally well under such condition. I know programs that will play moves, without opening books, that even a beginner wont play. Do you (bruce) believe that playing without opening book, (so that bad book moves doesnt come out) is the ideal way to test games? Humans are not 100% correct, and I am well aware of that. But we can try to be as accurate as possible. If I make mistakes I have the courage to admit it. some don't and they fear that it's emberacing to them, so they just 'drag on' ie, "paradigm" Pavs ;)
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.