Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:32:04 06/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 23, 2001 at 10:01:58, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: >I'll try to explain a bit in response to this post since the other threat went >even more off topic. Too many people think that on the internet there is no >morale and they can behave as they wish - like they never would in the "real" >world. To respond to such brilliant argumentation takes me too long. > >> >>>IMHO computer accounts should have 1 formula and live by it. If you allow some >>>players to play it at 5 7 time controls you should allow everyone. It is >>>questionable to favor friends this way. Just a suggestion. >> >>Do you think it is 'questionable' if I let SunSetter play >>longer games vs Sjeng than I allow vs humans or other computers? > >I would say it is not a good idea and unrated might be better. But we both know >that humans benefit from more time a lot more than computers. So this comparison >is invalid IMHO. > >>Do you think it is 'questionable' I noplay some computers >>and clones? > >I seem to be very bad at explaining a point since few people understand. To >noplay some computers is no problem. To play against 99% of all opponents >normally and against me you let Sjeng play 1.a3 2.h3 would be a problem. Then Houston, we have a _big_ problem. I have been asked on _several_ occasions to fix up a specific opening book for a GM to play against. And an IM as well a couple of years ago. I happily agreed and did it... If it played that player, it would play one specific opening system. Against others it would play its normal varied openings... I don't see where this is a problem. I have seen GM players do this on ICC more than once against each other... > >> >>Do you think it is 'questionable' if I allow certain players >>to partner Sjeng and censor others? > >We were not discussing bughouse. > >> >>I think the amount of bullshit you have to cope with on a chesserver >>is 'questionable' and I DONT think it's 'questionable' to deal >>with it by allowing some people to play and others not or in > >I think most people in this forum lack the players perspective. Mr.Hyatt for >example or you will probably never come close to any computer in any chess >variant (note this is not intended to be an insult, I will probably never become >a GM either). So you don't have first hand experience how it feels to get kicked >out of a best list for example by people gaining an overrated rating by playing >your bots. I don't understand. "insight" didn't get kicked out of anything. He has _never_ had the "best record" for blitz. Roman has almost always held it... dating back 6 years... Before he even played computers on ICC. > > >> worse >> conditions. >> > >see above. > >>-- >>GCP > >-- >GVZ
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.