Author: Sandro Necchi
Date: 23:20:11 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 02:10:47, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 16, 2001 at 02:09:11, Sandro Necchi wrote: > >>On April 15, 2001 at 14:07:19, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On April 15, 2001 at 12:35:52, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>> >>>>On April 15, 2001 at 04:15:41, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 15, 2001 at 02:54:22, Sandro Necchi wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Sorry, but you all are testing COMMERCIAL versions! >>>>>> >>>>>>The tournament version of these programs are something else!!!! >>>>>> >>>>>>So this means different results. >>>>>> >>>>>>Hope to have been clear enough! >>>>>> >>>>>>Sandro Necchi >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Sounds like a lack of good arguments. "Hey, don't look at what exists now, just >>>>>imagine what could exist in a few months". >>>> >>>>WE ALL KNOW THAT THE TOURNAMENT VERSION OF OUR PROGRAMS ARE STRONGER AND >>>>DIFFERENT. >>> >>> >>> >>>Do you mean that the Shredder used during tournaments is stronger than the one >>>which is sold to your customers? >> >>Of course it is. It must score the best in a few games, not to mention other >>differences. I am sure you know it! >>The same is for all tournament versions of all programs! Do you mean you bring a >>weaker version to the championship tournament or the same one? > > > >Gambit Tiger won the french and dutch Open, and it was the commercial engine >(actually the last beta version). > >I think in the dutch open Jeroen has been influencing the choice of the opening >lines (the probability to play a line or another one), but apart from that it >was the commercial engine with the commercial book. > >Can you confirm here that there exist a special version of Shredder which is >playing in tournaments and which is not sold commercially? > > > > > >>>>NOBODY KNOWS WHICH PROGRAM IS THE BEST NOW BECAUSE NOBODY OWNS ALL THE NEW >>>>PROGRAMS. >>>> >>>>THE ONLY TIME ALL THE LATEST AND BEST VERSIONS MEET EACH OTHER IS IN THE WORLD >>>>CHAMPIONSHIP. WE ALL WORK HARD FOR ONE YEAR TO MAKE THE BEST AVAILABLE IN ORDER >>>>TO WIN IT. >>> >>> >>> >>>The only event where all the best programs meet each other, 365 days per year, >>>is the SSDF permanent tournament. >> >>I totally disagree! >>I am not against SSDF, which I know since years and admit they do a excellent >>job, but the use outclassed hardware and commercial versions only! > > > >They use the software and hardware that most people use. Is it unfair? >And they test the programs generally immediately after they reach the stores, so >I would not call this outclassed software. > > > > > >>>So many games are played, compared to the world championships, that the >>>tournaments you are talking about look like a child's joke. >> >>You must be kidding or trying to minimise the fact that you did not win the >>world champion title. No other explanations to me. > > > >I have won the spanish championship, the french championship, the dutch >championship, the Aufsess tournaments and many other private (but very serious) >tournaments. > >But I would not claim superiority because of these titles. > >The ultimate test is the SSDF list. Unfortunately I notice that Shredder is >hiding from this. > > > > >>>>SO THE LAST TIME THIS HAPPENED WE WON. >>>> >>>>CAN YOU STATE THE CONTRARY??????? >>>> >>>>NO YOU CANNOT. >>> >>> >>> >>>For how many years are you going to base all your propaganda on short >>>tournaments? >> >>Until we win the next tournament. Then we will start again! > > > >Any idea when you will accept the real challenge and let the SSDF publish the >true results? > > > > >>>Should I state the number of tournaments my program has won every time I run out >> >>Your program is very strong and you are a skilled programmer, but the most >>important tournament is the world championship. This is the point, you cannot >>play around it! > > > >I think I can notice disinformation when I see it. > >It is obvious that you are trying to squeeze every drop out of the WM title of >Shredder, but I don't think you should assume people are so stupid that they do >not notice that Shredder is hiding from the SSDF list. > >If it is so good, why did Weiner fight to forbid the SSDF from publishing the >result like is own life was in danger? > >If it is so good, what is the problem in playing a qualifying match against Deep >Fritz and Deep Junior? Weiner withdrew from the match as soon as he has learned >that there would be a qualifying round. If Shredder is superior, where is the >problem? > > > > > >>>of arguments? >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>SO MY POINT IS WHICH EVER PROGRAM IS WORLD CHAMPION HAS THE RIGHT TO CHALLANGE >>>>THE WORLD CHAMPION. >>>> >>>>IF YOU WIN THIS YEAR YOU'LL BE THE ONE NEXT YEAR. >>>> >>>>IS THIS A LACK OF ARGUMENTS? >>>> >>>>I REALLY DON'T THINK SO. >>> >>> >>> >>>Be real. Let Shredder enter the SSDF list and let's see what happens. >> >>I told you that the commercial versions are weaker, so SSDF can only state how >>strong is the commercial version which is sold to the pubblic and with the >>hardware they use! > > > > >That's absolutely incredible, or I don't understand what you mean. > >So you are actually saying here that you are fooling your customers? > >"World champion" is written on the box of Shredder, but actually what is sold is >weaker than the actual world champion??? > >Can you please confirm this? No, what I mean is that the tournament versions are always the latest one, so the book. The program is updated nearly everyday! Also a commercial version needs more variety in the book. That's normal! Sandro Necchi > > > > >>>If you can win all 9 rounds tournaments, you are not afraid of winning a 40 >>>rounds tournament, are you? >> >>No we are not afraid, but it cost time and money. Having won the real important >>one why we should attend more tournaments. > > > >It wouldn't cost a dime. Just send a few CDs to the SSDF, they will do the job >for you. > > > > >>Shall we win a tournament every week to have everybody admitting until the next >>week that we are the stronger? >>Anyway, I respect your opinion, but you should respect mine which is the one I >>told you. >>This ends the discussion to me. > > > >It's not a matter of respecting the opinion or not. It is just a matter of >facts. > >Knowing on what are based your opinions should argue in their favor, isn't it? >So you can explain what you think... > > > > Christophe
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.