Author: Chessfun
Date: 08:10:15 04/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 29, 2002 at 10:34:05, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On April 29, 2002 at 09:21:26, Chessfun wrote: > >>"A game" and you post that header?. > >of course. "of course" that's the best you can do?..lol >>I would rather see 100 lightning games than one game which tells anyone >>absolutely nothing. > >you have no idea about computerchess, right ? Funny and I was thinking that about you after your header....oh well. >one game is 40 moves, is 80 half-moves, >is 80 x 3 minutes search main lines. Is it. you have no idea about computerchess or math, right ? >one game is at least 20 times 0.00 for fritz. >one game is the game fritz needs to win the title. > >your 100 lighting games are maybe important for >people playing lighting games. but >noone would replay your 100 lighting games. because they are >completely unimportant. About as impostant as your single game. But i'll let you in on a secret. My 100 games would give me some idea of the book of the two programs as I'd see the scores out of book. And what is it we learn from your single game posting....absolutely nothing as usual. >your 100 lighting games are like the rain on the streets. >when it is over, the people walk on the streets as if nothing >has happened. > >if you want information, replay a game. but replaying a lighting >game is wasting time , as wasted as counting the drops of the rain. As if posting one single game, with the header you used isn't a waste of time. A waste of time for people who read it and for people who take note in such rubbish. >but have "fun" with you 100 lighting games that tell nothing. As I wrote above, proves once again how little you know. >i have fun with my 1 game that took a few hours. >i had fun watching this game. Yep I can just see it now. Let me set up my PC's for this great "KS-400" autoplayed game. If you'd have used something a little faster you could have saved yourself a few hours. Chris Taylor already posted a score "series" using AMD 1700's. Watching two "KS-400's" is like watching the grass grow or cricket. >in your world humans are unimportant. and if they are >there, you present them a number: 36-64 ! No I simply present a series of statistics without bias, something you have always seemed unable to achieve. >and they say ONE WORD ! > > >in my world >it needs human beeings to watch the games. A least you didn't spell it "beans". >and they share computerchess while doing so. Agh is that what you were doing, "sharing". Well speaking for myself maybe next time you can share with a little more balance. Sarah.
This page took 0.01 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.