Author: Chris Carson
Date: 07:11:30 06/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 26, 2001 at 09:20:44, Chessfun wrote: >On June 26, 2001 at 09:11:58, Chris Carson wrote: > >>1. I will not list people, however, if you read the attacks on my posts you >>will see who they are. >> >>2. I did not say "GM" anywhere in my post. "2100" is what critics have >>claimed, so "2100" is what I said. I have stated that I believe (and results >>show this) that "2400" in closed positions is what the results show. 2600+ for >>all results, 2900 for open positions. I seen nothing that points to "2100" for >>program performance in closed position. I see a single game losses, but not >>"2100" performance. > >How about 2150? ;-) > >>3. You can view my opinion as nonsense. I can live with that, but you will >>note that I do not follow your postings with follow-ups that say "nonsense". I >>do state my reasons with data if I have it, or I qualify as just my opinion. > > >Chris it isn't about viewing your opinion as nonsense. >You make a post which it itself may be insulting to others >then trivialize it. > >The same especially item 3) Ego could be said about those with opinions >that computers are of GM strength, either way IMO it's flammable. > >Sarah. Ofcourse I have an Ego. :) Flame away if that makes you happy. :) 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.