Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 05:13:33 11/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2000 at 07:25:08, Thorsten Czub wrote: >I am willing to learn anything. Yes, but I doubt you're able. >YOU claim a hype. there was none. Well, there was. Several posters chit-chatting about the excellence of the Rebel 11 package. As long as it's not Chessbase products then it's okay, right? Maybe CW failed to give you enough detailed advise. >show evidence that GT or RT is weaker than what the beta-testers said, >and i will except this. How is it that I'm supposed to produce evidence that an unsupported statement is untrue? That's not the way it works. When you argue that it's a well known fact without producing evidence to support it, then I'm not the one with the problem. The author of the statement provides the proof. Rather obvious to most I imagine. >your CLAIM from hear said has no weight for me , since i know that you have >nothing else. I'm not referring to hearsay. I don't need to. >of course then it seems 80 % of the facts i know is hype for you. Yes, your "facts" is indeed nothing but hype. Why did you include old GT games? Didn't the facts match your own version of reality? >all the archives contain is your offending posts against people >of this group. you have no data and piss on the people. >thats not exactly what i would call computerchess. And inventing your own facts as you go along is? >yes - the ssdf were ALWAYS trustworthy ! :-)))) At least they don't refer to imaginary games or mix different versions to support their own conclusions. Mogens.
This page took 0.02 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.