Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 16:05:41 03/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 27, 2002 at 18:42:41, Chessfun wrote: >On March 27, 2002 at 17:09:27, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On March 27, 2002 at 13:09:16, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On March 27, 2002 at 12:52:27, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>OK that was what you meant, was an extraordinary claim. >>>Mine is that you wrote; >>> >>>"There are plenty of games at ICC where GM's and IM's are still winning more >>>than losing to comps." >> >>Well there are wether you are aware of it or not. > > >Then we just come back to, as I previously wrote; >"Please name just one". > > >>So you concur they are Super GM's? Maybe at G/2 but not at slow time controls. >>You're right though, it's opinion, not _scientific_ fact! > > >I never gave my opinion. Simply stated Chris Carson posted a list in support of >his arguments. > >>>>GM Roland Schmaltz, aka Hawkeye, probably has a good score against computers and >>>>I'm certain there are a few more, who play at ICC. I know he's LETHAL to most >>>>humans!;) Of course I know you know the latter. Who doesn't?:) >>> >>>Actually I doubt Hawkeye has a good record. He won't AFAIK even play them >>>anymore. >>So you don't know. He has a super record against humans, so it is >>logical he must win many or quite a few games against computers as well, maybe >>not as well as human matches, but not all humans are so bad against machines. >>I may be wrong, maybe I should contact him? However, then I would only have >>his word not proof, if he told me he faired 60/40 or whatever the number. >>Niether of us can know for certain. > > >Yes maybe he does win quite a few. But there is a big difference between quite a >few and; "GM's and IM's are still winning more than losing to comps." > > >>>I know of NO human playing on ICC who has a positive result against a >>>professional program at any controls. Especially in mind is they play more than >>>one game. > >>So you don't actually know do you? Not for certain, as I can't know with any >>real certainty either? > > >Then you shouldn't have made the statement. I simply challenged you to prove >your statement. > >Sarah. I'll write what I think is probably true, even if I may have over played my POV. Hell many here make outlandish claims, but you want me to prove my statement? You're right this is going in circles. I'm not a grandmaster, but if a computer plays into something I know well I'll crush it! However I can't prove this to you. Terry
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.