Author: Dan Ellwein
Date: 22:01:23 01/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2001 at 19:24:47, Ed Schröder wrote: >On January 18, 2001 at 14:36:34, Harald Faber wrote: > >>On January 18, 2001 at 06:18:37, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: >> >>>On January 18, 2001 at 06:04:05, Harald Faber wrote: >>> >>>>It is likely that it will hurt Rebels creditability, not the SSDF's. Consider >>>>that. It might have been better to forbid publishing results gained by playing >>>>auto232-games with Century 3. I would have done so. >>> >>> >>>Before we started autoplaying Century 3, Ed expected C3 to come fifth ind the >>>SSDF list. Well it did not, but it only miss it by 29 point, so IMO C3 is not >>>doing that bad. >> >>Not that bad, right. But bad enough and worse than the real strength. >>Think of all the guys who look at the list at the top-3. Oops, no Century in >>sight. Far away, so not worth any further look. I cannot say how much this hurts >>Rebels reputation and sales, but it definitely does. Remember all the other >>programs that performed worse in their predecessor version, like MChessPro. A >>pity. > >Of course a bad rating on SSDF is a reason for loss of sales among experienced >comp lovers. But I bet that 70-80% of people who buy Rebel don't even know >about the SSDF list. SSDF is just one of the available advertising tools. yes Ed... in my case I bought Rebel without even knowing where it was on SSDF... I knew it was a strong program, so it didn't matter to me what place it occupied on the SSDF list... pilgrimdan >Of course here in CCC, SSDF is a hot item. > >Ed
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.