Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 18:48:33 06/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2001 at 21:01:56, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Absolutely right. BTW, the word "absolute" has no meaning in ANY kind of >measurement. Except absolute zero which is unreachable, so you're right anyway. ;-) >Even to measure the height of a person is, although a very simple >experience, not absolute: you just compare him with a pattern of measurement. >And then, maybe, you say he is taller or shorter than this another guy. Which >would be an "absolute" height? Depends on what time of the day the measurement is taken, also. >Else: which could conceivably be an absolute measure of chess strenght? Perhaps >comparing every chess player with God's chess ability. But, who knows? Maybe He >is not so good after all. Other business to attend. If they bring back odd's games, I would be willing to try with this setup, but nothing less: [D]1QN1k1BQ/1QRNBNRQ/2QQ1QQ1/8/8/8/8/7K w - - Then I'd resign. It would be too embarassing to lose.
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.