Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 13:43:20 06/01/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 01, 1998 at 11:39:38, Moritz Berger wrote: >>Nobody of them wants to tell their doubts in a public forum because they >>found it under their level to discuss with enrique or moritz in the way >>the matter is discussed here. > >If this isn't a direct personal attack, I don't know what else could be >... Whatever it is, it is the truth. I know many people having no wishes to discuss their opinions in this forum. And the main reason is that they have had enough reading the discussions i was involved and having seen how you, enrique, dirk and others have lead the discussion. I don't like this since we lost something. With almost any voice we lose, we lose variety. You can take this as an insult. But i am only telling what others have sent me in emails. >Wasn't it the other way round? no. >I fully subscribe to Don's great statement and think he nailed it down >precisely what went wrong in this debate. If you believe this the whole debate starts again at the beginning. Well done Don. Now we have a circle. I would advise to post the old stuff again, that we remember it better. This would spare it to repost it again. >... so you create your own reality. You can reproduce every single move >of every published game, but that's not enough, of course. Why? Because >everybody's cheating. By not playing the games and lines and openings it would lose, it gets better results. Because it only plays the winning games/lines, we cannot prove anything wrong. Since we can also replays the winning games, but YOU don'T get our losing games. Shall I really quote again Kaare's comment he gave 1 month before. Don't you understand this NOT PLAYING THE LOST GAME stuff ? And that we don't have any chance to prove this ? You don't see this, don't you? >... but call them bean counters instead? This is a term chris invented. I subscribe to it. I don't think it is a big insult. It comes pretty close to my materialist term. >You argue that we are bean counters when we draw conclusions from 100 >games when you draw opposite conclusions from 1 or 2 games? You don't >even have enough beans to show but nonetheless count them maliciously: >1,2,3, Fritz sucks. I have enough beans moritz ! In opposite to you, I play more games manually than you do automatically. >Polemic comments? Don's post was quite neutral, in my opinion. I guess this is part of the problem, you don't even SEE it. >>You do as if it has to do with people not able to realize the facts. > >Yes, I feel the same about some people sometimes. Part of the problem. >And you refuse to talk about any single game from SSDF or Enrique, >right? Because they used the "cheating" autoplayer. The games Fritz5 plays in ssdf is not the problem. It is the games it is NOT playing. But i am sure you will not understand what I mean with that. And will call it illogic. Your problem. >Why don't you say that you don't like Fritz' style? I would even >partially subscribe to this! And ? Does this say anything why I don't get the results it should get? Pah - >You predicted that Fritz 5 would end up about the same like Fritz 4 did >on the SSDF list. I did not counted the cheating. How could I. In my world cheating is not allowed. Or should not. >Why don't we just end this debate? It's getting pretty much nowhere. Thats exactly what my friends told me, why they don't want to tell their opinion in front of persons like you moritz. If you call this an insult. ok. But i only want to be honest.
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.