Author: Don Dailey
Date: 20:50:22 02/24/98
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Thorsten, Do you ever read your own posts? I just read all of your stuff since the rating announcement and am embarassed for you. I think your posts are the most emotional and least informative of all the ones I read. It's very clear you love computer chess but you do not seem to look at ANYTHING with any kind of objectivity. I just recently realized that I always look forward to reading your stuff but I am becoming conditioned to ignore any conclusions you arrive at. In fact if I discovered that I agreed with you on something I would probably seriously rethink my point of view! OK, I'm kidding about this but you get the point! It's pretty obvious you really hate the Fritz people and I don't really understand (or care about) the politics involved. I do know that Fritz is a strong program and would like to remind you that it is the current world champion. There is certainly enough evidence to at least believe it belongs near (if not AT) the top. Why don't you reserve judgment for a while and see what happens? But keep the posts comming, I always look forward to reading them! Your friend, Don On February 24, 1998 at 16:52:00, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>Time will tell. I disagree. You can only do so much computing and >>still >>hit an NPS value of X. Hiarcs is clearly slow. So I assume it is doing >>a >>lot at each node. Ditto for MchessPro. But if you want to call Rebel >>"knowledged" then we have to call Fritz "knowledged" as well since it is >>obviously whacking rebel and everyone else fairly soundly. > > >I cannot follow this logic. >Fritz outsearches Rebel BECAUSE rebel is slower than Fritz5. >If you watch how rebel plays and how fritz5 plays I wonder that you call >FRITZ knowledged and not rebel ? >I can only take the main-lines and the games as my evidence. You can >call the RESULTS as your evidence. >But the results don't tell us much about HOW the games have been played. >The main-lines and evaluations DO IN FACT tell me much about HOW rebel >works and how fritz5 works. >Fritz5 is stupid, rebel9 is knowledged. Not the way Hiarcs or Mchess is >knowledged (they do it more static) but relatively to fritz. > >This is only my little opinion. If you believe more in Fritz, stay free >to do it. I will not use Fritz anyway for my personal analysis or >email-chess, it would be a major mistake to use Fritz5 because it is a >dump program. > > > >> And >>"knowledge" >>is a term I would use *very* loosely when talking about Fritz. It seems >>to >>have "good knowledge" but I suspect it is really just "quite finely >>tuned >>general/simple knowledge" based on the speed it searches. > >?!! Now you sound like myself. Right. Fritz has simple knowledge. > > > > Of course, >>there's >>nothing to say that finely tuned simple knowledge can't produce a true >>GM >>one day either... > >Shit x 1000 is still shit. Although it could kill a GM, e.g. when you >throw 1000 tons of shit over Karpov, he will maybe not only die but also >lose the game therefore. ONE method to win a game of chess ! But not the >method I like. >Sorry. > >Sorry. Prejudices. You have yours, I have mine.
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.