Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What is:Kramnik really saying about Fritz's strength? - GM level??

Author: Chris Carson

Date: 16:03:55 06/25/01

Go up one level in this thread


On June 25, 2001 at 18:55:52, Albert Silver wrote:

>On June 25, 2001 at 17:48:40, Chris Carson wrote:
>
>>On June 25, 2001 at 17:01:56, Albert Silver wrote:
>>
>>>I didn't say to disregard the result of Dortmund, but to disregard Dortmund
>>>concerning the complaint I was making. In other words, regard it! :-)  I realize
>>>we must do with what we have, but if we are going to flash results and
>>>statistics, then all the provisos regarding those results and statistics must be
>>>considered and declared. In other words, show the results, but be honest about
>>>the limitations or possible problems. Yes, Junior performed brilliantly, and
>>>*perhaps* this represents its true strength, but unfortunately it is only one
>>>tournament. Karpov had an absolute field day in Linares 1994 (I think it was 94)
>>>but did this really represent his relative playing strength against the other
>>>players? Yes, we have data, but it is a couple of tournaments, for two different
>>>programs, and a collection of single games here and there. It's still a far cry
>>>from nothing, but it's also a far cry from being conclusive. With all due
>>>respect. Here's another tidbit: you'll sometimes read about some top board
>>>performer in league play. Such as Christiansen did a couple of times in the
>>>Budesliga with scores on the order of 12/13, etc. With such a result does this
>>>mean he is a WC contender? Unfortunately not. It's a fantastic result but it is
>>>very different from playing a tournament. Perhaps Junior wouldn't be any
>>>different, but what about the players it played and the circumstances?
>>>
>>>                                        Albert
>>
>>Albert,
>>
>>Where is the data that supports your position that programs are not 2600?  At
>>least I present data when asked.  I am entitled to my opinion also.  I did
>>present the data and I did state the qualifiers.  I hope you will bring data (a
>>couple of hundred games) when you argue your point, the same as I have and the
>>meeting the same requirements you have stated.  All I see is your opinion, you
>>are entitled to it as I am entitled to mine.  Please support your opinon with
>>the same criteria based data you demand from others.  I never ever said FIDE
>>rating.  I presented the data that is available, I did the calculations and put
>>some effort into this.  It is easy to critize.  I admit when I make a mistake,
>>please do not represent me as trying to hide something or tyring to lie or
>>trying to do something else unethical, I am honest and I do not appreciate you
>>implying "dishonest".
>>
>>I also do not say to the person, that looks dishonest, instead offer my opinon
>>with data to back it up, or I state that I have no basis, just a gut feeling.
>>
>>If you really think I am a "dishonest", lying, decieving, person who has some
>>deep dark reason for "wanting" programs to be "2600" and fabricating all the
>>results, then just attach a single line message to all my posts saying that.  At
>>least then I know where you stand and will leave you out of future debates with
>>me.
>>
>>Chris Carson
>
>I think you are completely misconstruing what I wrote. I never said, much less
>meant to imply, that your results are dishonest or in any way deliberately
>misleading. Nor did I say that programs are less than 2600. I said nothing at
>all in fact regarding their strength here. All I said was that the data may lead
>some less circumspect readers to take it at face value, and that these
>accumulated and averaged out results are presently THE rating for the programs.
>They certainly represent data to digest, and represent the best statistical
>information available, but they are still not conclusive. That is all I said. I
>have no idea why you think I take this personally, I don't. You presented data,
>and I said it wasn't conclusive and explained why. That's all.
>
>                                         Albert

My mistake.  Sorry I read to much into your post, my only rational for reading
more than what you wrote is that I have read so many posts on this subject, I
think I get overwhelmed sometimes.  Sorry.  :)

Best Regards,
Chris Carson



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.