Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 14:47:09 02/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 1998 at 16:44:03, Thorsten Czub wrote: >> 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... Nope... >> 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... You are not going to compare 11 games in Paris with 200 by SSDF, are you. >WHO of you believes that Fritz5 is that stronger than Fritz4 ??? I do. Anybody that tested Fritz 5 without prejudices does. It is that strong. Nimzo is strong too. And Moritz was right all along. I admit I didn't expect so much improvement from Fritz 5. But I knew it was as strong as Hiarcs 6, Rebel 9 or Nimzo98. Enrique >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 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.