Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 05:35:03 04/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 1998 at 08:02:15, Andreas Stabel wrote: >When I was going to vote today I was very disappointed to notice that >the voting was set up to go against Fritz. I have not entered this >debate earlier but have with interesst read the arguments for and >against the correctness of the SSDF results. > >The question to be answered at the poll was: >1) Fritz 5 had an unfair advantage >2) The Fritz 5 rating is accurate with respect to the other programs >3) Abstain > >You had to select one of the above. > >Now everybody can see that alternative 2 is not the opposite of >alternative 1, so even if you think that Fritz 5 did NOT have an >unfair advantage, you wouldn't agree with alternative 2. As almost >everybody here has commented the SSDF results are NOT accurate, so >most persons, myself included, would hesitate to select alternative 2 >even though we clearly disagree with alternative 1. The result of this >voting is therefore absolutely worthless and the poll should be stopped. > >For the record, the only objective way to conduct a poll with predefined >alternatives is to have all sensible alternatives listed or at least to >have opposite views as alternatives. > >Still I very much appresiate the work done by the CCC and enjoy this >site very much. > >Best regards >Andreas Stabel I also think the options could have been formulated better. Still, option 2 is good enough for people like me that think Fritz 5 deserves to be on top of the SSDF list because it performed well in their matches and there is nothing fishy about them, in spite of all the campaigns that tried to claim otherwise without any proof whatsoever. Enrique
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.