Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 15:59:14 05/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2001 at 17:29:43, Thorsten Czub wrote: >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. It's possible but I don't care. It's not like any of the people involved here, including GM Keene, would do any better against Shirov. And, in the hopes of scoring a good game or two, if Keene wants to play, my computer's always on, except when my wife wants to run the teapot. bruce
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.