Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 04:11:45 11/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2000 at 06:24:51, pavel wrote: >LOL, >I get your point. >when GT plays against crafty, crafty becomes "punching bag" of the old paradigm. of course. bob is very conservative and - i think i remember it was chrilly donning who wrote in an edition of computerschach and spiele, that the commercial programmers have to thank bob, because he releases crafty sources. chrilly said ( i don't remember the accurate word order but ...) that the rusty way and also senseless ideas give so many traps to new programmers, that the commercial programmers can sleep very well, thinking on all the amateurs that start with crafty. if ONE program is old paradigm, that it is crafty. crafty does not need to compete with others like the commercials. it is open source. >when GT plays against junior6, the results is almost 50%, your 'defense >mechanism' comes out saying "CT is better against junior6 then GT" Right. RT gets better results than GT against Junior. Overall i get better results with GT than with RT. but especially against Junior the results work better with RT. whats wrong with this ? junior can be lucky to get 50%. thats very good for GT and also for junior, since junior is - overall - the weaker program. >DUH!!! D U H ?? can you explain this word ?! :-)) >now dont tell CT is also the result of "new paradigm" no - it isn't. it is state of the art old paradigm. does the new paradigm has to be stronger in results than the old paradigm ? don't you realize that it is christophes FIRST effort, version 1.0 ? RT is version 13 ! wait until gambit-tiger is version 13 and i am sure junior will not anymore be a problem. also you don't understand that it is pretty normal to have at least ONE fear enemy. it would be an exception NOT to have (at least) ONE fear enemy. >isnt this supposed to be a test between the best of "old paradigm" and the best >of "new paradigm", that i suggested? What do you want to test ? old paradigm programs are on the market for years. new paradigm programs are rare. isn't it important that even new paradigm programs are that serious in the moment, that you cannot oversee them or take them as jokes. programmers of the other program HAVE to work against it. they cannot surpress. with cstal they were able to make jokes, but not with tiger. and even with cstal it worked in paris. or arround 1997/98. >you know, you are so predictable and I am almost damm sure what you are gonna >say next, and all I can do is kick back and laugh about it :) laugh. this is a free world. it costs nothing to laugh and makes healthy. >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.