Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Sheep

Author: Moritz Berger

Date: 12:57:39 04/04/98

Go up one level in this thread


Below, Thorsten insinuates that Fritz' success might be due to killer
books.

If the SSDF received the commercial PowerBook CD with 8 million
positions, does anybody feel like me that Thorsten's claim is
superficial (he doesn't have the PowerBook CD and lost his ability to
read or would have otherwise read the official statement from ChessBase
in his pet magazine Europa Rochade 04/98 that the SSDF didn't even use
the PowerBook for most of the games but the default Fritz book on the
plain vanilla standard commercial Fritz CD!)?

Thorsten, unless you have anything *new* to contribute to this
discussion, I propose we all shut up about it (at least on the level of
"not believing" 500-1000 games). This is not Kindergarten.

Moritz


On April 04, 1998 at 14:21:10, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>On April 03, 1998 at 18:45:24, Scott Carmichael wrote:
>
>> Why should anyone care about lines that were not played ? They
>>obviously didn't have any outcome upon the results if they were not
>>played. Or perhaps now you think Fritz can earn ELO by simply not
>>playing at all.
>
>You do not understand how chess programs play openings and how they get
>ELO in sweden. You simply do not understand how it works. Maybe you
>don't have an autoplayer pair. Maybe you never worked on a chess
>program. Maybe you are a consumer only buying the programs. Whoever you
>are, you don't know how it works.
>The lines NOT played are lines played BEFORE at home on hundreds of
>autoplayer games. They were locked and this way the program has ANTI
>books against different opponents.
>NOT playing lines that are winning lines of the opponent CAN increase
>the ELO.
>
>Crafty e.g. has a big PGN-book out of human-chess-games.
>But it has also a learning file where the program learn NOT to play lost
>lines.
>Mchess has it too. CSTal of course. Others too.
>This influences the outcome of a match.
>
>
>>  Pleae don't embarrass yourself, or others that you claim have
>>supportive data when they refute your statements here, by continuing to
>>post such inept correlations.
>
>Thanks for your advise but I will not follow it.
>Only because you don't understand about the concepts I will not shut my
>mouth just YOU are naive.



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.