Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 10:46:20 05/25/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 1998 at 11:21:11, Tony Hedlund wrote: > >Thorsten! > >You have completly misunderstand Arpad Elo's system of measure players >strength. Bravo ! I would advise you to continue to test Fritz against weak programs on weak hardware. As you have told us, this stabilized its elo. Thats exactly what ChessBase needs. I am sure you have a reason for this too. I am not discussing ELO numbers with you. I am discussing the question why you test a program against opponents , nobody is interested in. Why don't you test the new Comet-Version instead ? Why don't you test Virtual2 instead ? Why don't you test new Diogenes instead ? Why don't you test crafty instead ? There are many programs you could test that do not appear on the list. Instead you do "senseful" testing against Nimzo3.5. I am sure this helps Fritz. And I am sure you will now come with the point: We have always done this in the past. Exactly . And thats why you can count that I will complain further. >The strength (platform) of the opponent have no importance, if the >difference is >not higher then 400 points. Depending on what you want to show. If you want to show that your ELO ranking is ok, than you can continue like this. You work like a self-fullfilling prejudice. You know in forward which programs are not strong enough that they need state-of the art harware, and when you oput them on nostalgic platforms and let them play against the state of the art hardware and they fail to win, than you say: oh - we SAID that this would happen. Why do you test anyway, if you know in forward that some programs don't need a fast hardware, meanwhile other programs (Fritz) get it by guaranty/agreement. ?
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.