Author: Mike Castañuela
Date: 10:47:12 05/28/98
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 1998 at 11:26:08, Tony Hedlund wrote: >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 I am not interested in Fritz, neither I own Fritz. (as opposed to other, for good or for wrong). I have seen some games of Fritz vs. Genius and Rebel (Nunn matches) showing, in its plays, a powerful game. But it is obvious (and tired) hearing the anti-campaign of Thorsten toward Fritz, without showing bases and proofs, to date, that support the "Fritz weak" teoria (Anand loser? by God!). I coincide with the opinnion of Mr. Hedlund.
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.