Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 15:16:30 05/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 1998 at 17:17:06, Djordje Vidanovic wrote: >Hello Thorsten! This is Rolf speaking (pulling your leg, of course >:-)))) :-))) Wer den Schaden hat , braucht fuer den Spott nicht zu sorgen ! > Anyway, just wanted to go along with Don and Fernando... as you >may have presumed already. The philosopher that I'd like to invoke is >not Kant, but Plotinus who said that what you do you do only if you are >not aware of your doing it! For example, if you read, you read only if >you are not aware of reading -- if you are aware that you are reading, >then you are actually NOT reading anymore... Think about this, Thorsten. Ahem. My english is not that good that I could easily follow philosophy. Sorry. Its enough for going to dinner with bruce, or for operating an english program.... >So, in order to have a program play chess it need not be terribly aware >of what it does -- in other words it need not have any meta-theoretical >knowledge, positional knowledge, or what not, explicitly programmed in >and still play good and POSITIONAL chess, on condition it is fast enough >(e.g. if it finds a mate in 30, without being very sophisticated, that >is the very best move in the given position, isn't it? both the best >tactical and positional one, right?). As i said, i doubt this. > Just ask a 2440 FIDE, an >excellent friend of mine, who is losing his 5 1 (one sec inc) match vs >Fritz 5 41-7! Than the playing style of your friend does not fit much to the playing style of fritz. MY good friend has 2430. and he has no problems against fritz. > Ask him about Fritz's not being able to play positional >chess and he'll reply that Fritz has beaten him a dozen times purely on >the basis of the strong/weak bishop or good/bad pawn structure steering >the mid-game into a won ending. I can ask him, but i would have problems to be serious and not to laugh. I think the problem we have is that you say: My friend A has 2440 and is afraid of Fritz playing positional strong. And I say: my friend B has 2430 and laughs about Fritz. My friend visits me, and I have no chance with my computers. And programs like The King and Fritz have the slowest chance to win. Sorry, but only my own experience. I assume the key of this different experience has to do with playing style. A human A with 2440 ELO is not the same as a human B with 2439 ELO and A and B have different - not corresponding playing styles. >This is not only a question related to Fritz but to all fast searchers >and the question is one of methodology, something that Fernando >addressed in a typically philosophico-sociological manner. You do not >seem to be able to accept a DIFFERENT approach without EVALUATING it and >labelling it as 'weak', 'poor', etc. Pah - I do of course evaluate ! I have favors. I do not like anything. I do accept their approach. But when Bernd comes into my home and I have new software or hardware, he gives me a competition. And I always think: NOW i will have a chance. He is doing with me since I came with my Mephisto II into my chess-club. And I have never a chance. >Why not only say -- different, or >not likable, without those ugly little danglers - weak, poor, etc. I >have never said that Hiarcs, CST or Mchess are weak, they are different >from fast searchers, and they are very, very strong programs... However, >I simply cannot accept your statement that Fritz 5 is a weak program. 1. You misunderstand me. I have said it is different. Please don't forbid me to EVALUATE things. I buy them. I play with them. I comment on them. I do the same with my friends. If I would not honestly tell people arround me what I think about them or the world, how would they find out else ? Evaluation or naming things is not evil. What you make out of it could be misuse. I tell my friend about my values to join and share with them, to discuss and to learn from them. If I would not exchange OPINIONS i would not want to be with them. It begins when I ask : how do you feel. If they would not tell me, how should I be sure that they are ok if I do not hear from them for a long time. 2. I stay to my statement. >That statement is patently false and can be easily refuted in many ways. That is your opinion. Do you want a dictatorship with you telling me what I would have to THINK about ? Do you want to tell me how I should VALUE the world. I would not like this. > You keep saying that Fritz 5 is weak in the face of its results against >other programs -- can you, please, corroborate it? I do not want your >evaluation (you are quite free to feel any which way about Fritz) Thanks. I thought your statement meant other way arround. Now I am happy that you don't force me to think your way... > -- I >am already perfectly aware that you do not like fast searchers , What a good thing that other people know me better than myself. I hope you will never decide about my life... I do not like 1 from 4 fast-searchers. Point. But you know me better - of course :-))) And you know me PERFECTLY better. Even that !! We never met, but you know me perfectly better !! Yes - life can be very cruel to its creatures. >I want >your reasons for saying that it is weak. OK? I hope we understand each >other now, :-)))? My reasons. Ok - in the moment i cannot access my machines since I play for Christophe some games and have no access to Fritz. But - i will come back to REASONS later, ok ?! > >Best regards, > >Djordje
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.