Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 13:44:03 02/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
> Rating + - Games Won Oppo > ------ --- --- ----- --- ---- > 1 Fritz 5.0 Pentium MMX 200 MHz 2589 54 -50 198 67% 2463 Is it april yet ?? Who faked this ?? I accept many things. But this only within ranges. And THIS result is out of my ranges. No - this must be a joke... > 2 Nimzo '98 Pentium MMX 200 MHz 2534 43 -40 297 63% 2436 So we have 2 of the programs have played the weakest way in Paris do now win almost everywhere ??!!?? How does this fit together ? Why did those 2 programs fail miserably in Paris ? Pah - this is advertising not testing... WHO of you believes that Fritz5 is that stronger than Fritz4 ??? This is nonsense. They should stop publishing this list, because the list itself shows that the list is not working ! They seem to have so many system immanent bugs that any kind of rating seems to be pretty hopeless. Do you really believe this ? I realized that Nimzo is stronger. I was able to feel it at home. Other tournaments showed this. But Fritz5 ? Hu ! This is a joke. My question: Why stopped Goran his work ? Is there any casual relation to Fritz5 ELO ?! >We have a new leader of the rating list! Fritz 5.0 >P200 MMX has got 2589 after 198 games!! That's >the highest rating ever and 55 points more than >any other entrant has! And it is not real. > >Fritz 5 is about 160-170 points stronger than Frans >Morschs earlier program versions! And you really believe what you write down ? It only shows how worthless your whole project has developed. It looks pretty faked. NO Fritz version was EVER 170 ELO points stronger than the predecessor ! This is absolute nonsens. We are all blind if this is true. No - there is a hidden parameter in your work. Search for it or the people will laugh about your list... >It's an enormous >improvement! Congratulations to Frans Morsch and the >ChessBase team!! It is an enourmous proof that the way you generate your results is 170 ELO points WRONG ! > >It has been claimed earlier that the results for >Fritz 3 and 4 would have been better if SSDF had had >PCs with larger RAM. Aha. >For Fritz 5 we have used at least >64 MB RAM. The auto232-version from ChessBase doesn't >work with less RAM... For most games the PowerBook has >been used and for the rest Fritz 5 has played from >the ordinary opening book. In both cases the book has >been on the hard drive in order to enable book learning. > So betray substitutes strength ! Betraying becomes a major part of STRENGTH and chess , computerchess has now reached the level of live. >The margin of error for the rating of Fritz 5 is still >about 50 points, so large changes could occur when more >games are played. But since the gap to the other programs >is 55 points and more, it is most likely that Fritz 5 will >keep it's first place for some time. As long as you find out where your mistake is. >The competitors have >a slight disadvantage since they have to play manually >against Fritz 5 as long as the auto232-version isn't generally >available. You don't measure playing strength. You measure something different from this. The PLAYING-STRENGTH-INCREASE your list avokes is not real. >Next rating list will be made mid April. > >Thoralf Karlsson I think it looks the list has given away all kind of worth now. I would advise Mchess8 to implement more killer-lines against Fritz5.
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.