Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess strength of these programs?

Author: Thorsten Czub

Date: 15:54:17 03/15/98

Go up one level in this thread


>Hi Thorsten,
>
>I make it short:

Yes , very short , ugh ! :-))))))


>1) I accept that you have no convincing Fritz results on your machine.

Bravo. And I guess this is because I am a prejudiced guy, isn't it ?!
I guess my machines feel the same prejudices ... :-)


>2) I also accept that not only one, but quite a number of others
>meanwhile has more positive (some of them *much* more positive9 test
>results.

How many of them do use the SO CALLED chessBase-autoplayer ?
Could this be a hidden-parameter into the whole problem ?!
I think so.

>3) I belong to 2).

I thought so. :-)


>a) I already had impressive results on a P133 with only 32Meg(engine
>games and tests)

really ?! Unbelievable.

>b) I had good results on two P75-machines run with double tournament
>time (to get P133 tournament games).
>After these games and tests I said: well, I think a Top5 program.

You were always a very good tester.
It seems I am completely unexperiences.
You are still my idol Dirk.

>c) I now even have even better results with engine games on my new
>P200MMx processor with meanwhile(!) 64 Meg.

Hm. And THIS is what makes me astonished. You use 44 MB Hash and you
have copied the fr5book.ctg on the HD like I have ? Do you play manually
or ChessBase autoplayer. Which time control ?!

>After these games and tests I say: well, maybe not quite as strong as
>the Swedish list suggests (you know I don't count doubles which occur
>quite often in owadays book learners etc...), but competing for rank 1
>anyway!

Hm. Unbelievable.



>4) I ask you: how many tournament games with Fritz5 do you have? 20? 30?

I don't know. I save them in Fritz database, but I create a new database
with each opponent I test against fritz.

I have to add before I knew exactly.


>5) You know what follows: I do *not* accept that you only consider the
>small number of your *own* games (and they can't be too many - played
>manually besides all the other testing you do).

You have your opinion. I do have mine. It is your free will to believe
whatever you want.


>So I think, to get a fair impression you *have* to consider more empiric
>material beside your own as long as you don't have very good reasons for
>the suspicion that not only a little bit, but a lot is wrong with how
>others test the same program.

As far as I have not seen this magic autoplayer of chessBase, as far as
I have not seen which lines were chosen and which not and why not, I do
not accept ANY single game this ChessBase autoplayer has ever played.
I repeat: I cannot accept ONE single game of an autoplayer that comes
with a book I don't know and I cannot proof it is the commercial book.
Sorry.



>I see no reason for such a suspicion at the moment.

I do see a reason.


>So all in all I still think that *you* are the one with a prejudice in
>*this* case and that *not* the impression of others - based on the
>*huge* majority of played test games - is mislead.

I am in good company. Stefan Meyer Kahlen and Richard Lang and Chrilly
Donninger and Kaare Danielsen seem to have "prejudices" too... :-)


>I frankly say that it is my personal impression that you don't like
>Fritz in a way that leads to prejudices from my view.

I have no problems to speak about prejudices. A prejudice that is known
and a mind open for a change is not a danger. The people beeing proud
that they have never changed their minds are the problem.



>I do not speak of
>prejudices in general, just in *this* case, for concrete reasons from
>our various talks about the matter.

I have no problems. I am used to speak about my faults.


>I know well you think it the other way round and think that I am biased.

:-)


>You should, however, *not* raise the false impression that Moritz or I
>are working for Chessbase.

You are in friendship with Matthias. And other people. I do understand
this. I like him too.


> We both know Matthias well, and years ago I
>gave them an an experimaental opening book I had made for my own fun.

Confirm here.


>Some years before I had some other contacts to people from Saitek, and
>many people here have had such kinds of contacts for reasons connected
>to their hobby.

Yes.

>Taken alltogether the contacts of Moritz and me, they
>are still *much* smaller by far than the contacts you had to a *lot* of
>computer companies in the course of years, partly cooperating *close*
>with some of them and some programmers then.

:-)


>All this without me *ever* having raised the suspicion that *this* could
>play any role for your testing! I found this remark of yours quite
>inappropriate, since you know me for a long time and I don't remember a
>single case where I would have acted according to influences by
>commercial interests.

I have not said YOU cheat. But I say you maybe use special ChessBase
autoplayer or whatever engine.

>We are talking about *personal* like and dislike and *personal*
>prejudices now, and that is something completely else. And I simply keep
>up my very personal impression from you that you have been *very*
>emotional and biased towards Fritz since a long time and especially
>towards Fritz5 recently.

:-)))

>But I should not get more serious than necessary about this. It's only
>about a program. We disagree sharply this time, I am aware now of this
>message from your last post now, but time will come and definitely tell
>sooner or later who of us was right.

:-)))


>Be shure that I will admit it *if*
>we find a big hair in the soup.

I am in this case a little like Andersch Klosterschueler in Sansibar
oder der letzte Grund. Sceptical.

>So let's take it how it comes and talk
>again after falsifying or verifying all the present results in a calm
>way...

>Yours Dirk

Sleep well. I don't wanna lose another friend this week.
I could not bear 2 in a week-end.




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.