Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 14:29:43 05/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2001 at 13:16:43, Larry Proffer wrote: >The game data will have been presented to him by somebody else. > >The game was a 'typical computer game' - meaning crappy old material grabber. As >you point out they could have found good games to illustrate Ferret - but it >appears they illustrated Ferret with a bad game. They could have illustrated >Ferret with ICC grade information - with game results, instead of game scores. > >But game results look good. This game score makes Ferret look bad (especially if >you conveniently forget 1996 and P133's). > >We know Enrique and Bertil don't usually deal in game scores. They deal in game >results. Enrique and Bertil are not specially known for their talents in >persuading grandmasters of the merits of programs based apon their chess >knowledge. > >This makes me suspect that the *originator* of this game score was someone other >than our experts. The originator of this game score, and its juxtaposition with >Ferret, was someone used to talking to grandmasters and who knows how to >influence them. > >Keene published this game because it was in his mind, and it had influenced him. >Or? now i do understand what you wanted to say with this. aha. looks plausible.
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.