Author: Tony Hedlund
Date: 08:26:08 05/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 25, 1998 at 13:46:20, Thorsten Czub wrote: >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. I don't think I take that advise. We mostly play against strong opponents. >As you have told us, this stabilized its elo. I've not said no such thing. >Thats exactly what ChessBase needs. I don't now what Chessbase needs. >I am sure you have a reason for this too. What reason might that be? >I am not discussing ELO numbers with you. Is it not what it's all about. Had Fritz5 got 100 points less you would have ignored it. >I am discussing the question why you test a program against opponents , >nobody is interested in. Who decide what's interesting, you? >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 ? We haven't got them. If you know the programmers, please ask them if they can send some copies to us. >There are many programs you could test that do not appear on the list. >Instead you do "senseful" testing against Nimzo3.5. Yes I agree. I also think it make sense to test against Nimzo 3.5. >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. I can give you a recent exemple. I played the match Fritz5 P200MMX 44MB - Comet32 P90 17.5-3.5. Aha, you say, there Fritz5 got some extra points. But instead it lost a few. Beacuse according to Arpad Elo's system the match should have ended 18-2. I guess most of the CCC people understand this point of the Elo system. I belivie you are not among them. >You work like a self-fullfilling prejudice. You know in forward which >programs are not strong enough I had the impression that it was you who had that gift. >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 We don't now that. >meanwhile other programs (Fritz) get it by guaranty/agreement. In general all new programs get the fastest hardware. But it is all about rescorses. Our's limited. Let me ask you a question. If you dislike us so much, why bother? You spend hours and hours to bickering us. I f you don't like us, just ignore us. Take it or leave it. Tony
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.