Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 14:28:47 05/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 1998 at 17:00:21, Don Dailey wrote: >I seem to have slightly offended you by attacking your open-mindnesses. Right. >But you never fail to go on and on about how much Fritz sucks. I do >not see a good reason for this considering that Fritz is a proven >program and is either the very best, or right there among them with >little difference in strength. I want to explain to you that i differenciate between the 4 programs (ChessTiger 11.2, Junior, Nimzo, Fritz). They play different. I like 3 and don't like the style of Fritz. I never fail to try to explain you that i differenciate. Yes. >If you want to complain about it's playing style, that is a separate >issue all together and since it's purely a subjective issue I would >not argue about it. ok. I agree with you. >No insult intended. I purposely chose my wording "you SEEM so ..." to >allow room for error on my part. I accept this. >Sorry. People with strong opinions like you and me can sometimes >appear to be not so open minded. I do not always agree with you >and you tend to back up everything you say with feelings and >subjectivity more than I do. But these are things you trust more >than I do. How many times times have you said something like, "I >don't need to see the results to know it sucks, I can tell by >looking at the moves?" Right. As I told you I have fritz and i HAVE TO play games with it, because I want to measure how my beloved programs play vs. Fritz. Before (in the past) I have done the same using genius. Since genius is not anymore a top program I have chosen Fritz as a victim to stand against the programs i feel for. > Right away your judgement is suspect in >my eyes. Hm. >But do not confuse this with imagination which I do NOT >accuse you of lacking. Imagination is a wonderful tool for new >ideas but at some point, the engineer must go to work. If I had to >choose a team to develop a strong program I would not use you for >evaluating or testing but instead to supply imagination (generate >ideas.) That is your profile as I see it. Ahem. Thanks. Again I am hurted, but - lets forget about wounds. We don't know if I would like to work on YOUR program since I don't know how it plays (I have not seen enough data about your program, evals, main-lines, games, live). Maybe I shall show games that dispointed me ? Examples ? Ok - will do so. >>Did you forgot out talks at Aegon ? There I found - yes : don is very >>open minded. For me the WAY a program plays is important. Not how it >>gets this >>way. I am not that much focussed only on RESULTS. If a program gets the >>same results (against computers) but plays worse I will of course buy >>the other programs. >I enjoyed very much our talks at Aegon and the games we played. >But as you say, I am certainly more results oriented than you. Anybody has its own values. For me it is a hobby and RESULTS are not important for me. I enjoy participation. I enjoy anything. Programs. Programmers. Event. Games. Etc. Results are only ONE part for me. >I don't care how >any program does it, as long as it can do it. I might feel differently >if I were in the commercial market, I might lean a little toward style >since some players value this. I you would be a consumer you would also (maybe) lean more on styling ! >Analogy. I am a tennis player. I absolutely love it and get to play >many different styles of opponents. Sometimes I get beat by players >that appear to be much weaker, sometimes I beat players that seem >very very strong and correct and beautiful strokes etc. But I >never complain when I get beat by the ugly player, I know I will >either beat him next time, or I won't if he's better. I don't care >who I play if he can beat me and I don't care HOW I get beat, the >challenge to me is overcoming this IF I CAN. Sometimes I cannot >and I have to concede that this player is better. But I've learned >something important from these "ugly" players that I might miss from >the "beautiful" ones. And this makes me more results oriented. >You focus more on the process itself and see more art in it than I >do. But that of course doesn't mean I don't appreciate beauty. Right. I would also not complain if somebody plays BRUTE-FORCE (Boris Becker) and others play beautiful (Henry Leconte) and others play with all my love with them (Jimmy Connors) and others i don't like (Lendl, McEnroe). for me Fritz is McEnroe. :-))) >I know other players who absolutely will not play these guys, they >demand opponents with a pretty game because they do not wish to >adapt, or it offends their sense of aesthetics. > >- Don Look, I am a customer. I don't want to see McEnroe complain at the referree or throw the rack on the floor or complain about the audience beeing to loud or making pictures in the moment he wants to serve or or or... I will not watch McEnroe playing, no matter how good he plays. I don't like people who cannot stand losing. I will also not watch Kasparov play because he is the same type of guy like McEnroe. Always shouting and bad mood, always saying others are the reason because he lost. I like Connors, Leconte. But Becker/Graf and Lendl and Mcenroe. Brute-Force-lousy-losers. :-)) You started tennis. :-))
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.