Author: Mark Young
Date: 11:20:31 08/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 1998 at 13:27:35, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On August 12, 1998 at 12:19:28, Mark Young wrote: > >>1. If so then why did you lie? > >I did not. YOU say I am doing ! > You said Fritz 5 lost to Rebel 10 in a match. And this was proof that Fritz 5 is weak. The fact was Fritz drew Rebel 10 in the match and Fritz was on a slower computer a P 200mmx for Fritz 5 Vs A P II 400 for Rebel 10. You set the condition of proof by saying ask Moritz. Moritz told the facts and it showed you are a liar. Now what should people call you. When you tell out right lies. And that you know they are out right lies. Face it you are a liar and anything you say sould be taken with a heavy dose of salt. > >>Is it because you have no facts to back up your >>point that fritz does play weak? > >Fritz plays weak. You can see it if you buy it, and let it play against another >program, if both machines have same speed. Try it yourself. And you see. >The method to call somebody a liar because he has different results is YOUR way. >Not my way. > >Today fritz played a draw against chessmaster 5550. > > > 1. ZARKOV 4.2C, (23) - (12) CHESS TIGER 11.5, > 2. MCHESS 7.1, (1) - (22) CRAFTY 15.17, > 3. CHESSMASTER 5000, (7) - (2) HIARCS6, > 4. WCHESS 1.04, (18) - (6) CSTAL WIN95, 0:1 > 5. CHESSMASTER 5550, (17) - (4) FRITZ 5.03 POWER.CTG, ½:½ > 6. JUNIOR5 BETA JUN.CTG, (5) - (10) DIEP 1.58.13, > 7. VIRTUAL2, (9) - (19) DIOGENES 4.70, 1:0 > 8. CHESS TIGER 11.2, (13) - (21) COMET A90, 1:0 > 9. REBEL 9, (3) - (24) SOCRATES X, 1:0 >10. GENIUS5, (8) - (14) NIMZO98 PADERBORN, ½:½ >11. PHALANX, (11) - (16) DIAMOND 2, ½:½ >12. EUGEN 7.5, (15) - (20) CAISSA98 5.10, 1:0 > >fritz's elo rating and performance within 3 games is not very good. so far it >is: > >FRITZ 5.03 POWER.CTG, 2574 2480 1.5/3 1.89 -3.9 2480 > >The many draws for fritz are typical... > >here is the game in round 3: > >[Event "summer-tournament"] >[Site "k6/200 40/120"] >[Date "1998.08.12"] >[Round "3"] >[White "CM5550"] >[Black "Fritz5.03"] >[Result "1/2-1/2"] > >1. e4 c5 2. c3 Nf6 3. e5 Nd5 4. d4 cxd4 5. cxd4 d6 6. Nf3 Nc6 >7. Nc3 e6 8. Bd2 dxe5 9. dxe5 Nxc3 10. Bxc3 Qxd1+ 11. Rxd1 Bd7 12. Ng5 Rd8 >13. Ne4 Bb4 14. Nd6+ Bxd6 15. exd6 e5 16. Bc4 f6 17. O-O g5 18. Rfe1 Bf5 >19. b3 Kd7 20. Rd2 Be6 21. Be2 Rc8 22. Bf3 b5 23. Red1 a5 24. Bb2 h5 >25. Be2 Na7 26. h3 b4 27. h4 gxh4 28. f4 Rc5 29. fxe5 fxe5 30. Re1 Nc6 >31. Bf3 Rg8 32. Bxc6+ Rxc6 33. Bxe5 h3 34. g3 h4 35. Kh2 hxg3+ 36. Bxg3 Rc3 >37. Bf4 Rf3 38. Be5 Rc8 39. Rg1 Rc5 40. Re1 Rf8 41. Bg3 Rfc8 42. Ree2 R5c6 >43. Bf4 Re8 44. Re5 Rxd6 45. Rxa5 Rxd2+ 46. Bxd2 Rg8 47. Bxb4 Rg2+ 48. Kh1 Re2 >49. a4 Bxb3 50. Rh5 Bxa4 51. Rxh3 Bc6+ 52. Kg1 Rg2+ 53. Kf1 Rc2 54. Rd3+ Ke6 >55. Rd2 Bb5+ 56. Ke1 1/2-1/2 > >>That may be true and you may have been right in the other case. But lets not be >>coy here. You know dame well you have lied > >no - > >I do not lie. >And calling somebody a liar is IMO against the charta of this group ! > > >>and in an attempt to smear fritz. > >Fritz5 plays weak. > > >>Not because you think fritz plays weak. Because not even you can show any data >>that supports this view. > >Wrong. I have enough data that shows this. > >>You lie because you have something against Chess Base > >I have nothing against chessBase. I have something against their methods. > >>or the programmer of fritz or something else. > >I have nothing against frans. He is a nice guy and i like him. In opposite to >you, he is not attacking somebody without having any evidence ! >In fact, he is a gentleman. You are not a gentleman. > >> I does not matter to me why you do >>this. > >right. You don't know anything. > > >>Only that you do. > >Do you have evidence of any kind. No. You call somebody a liar. Although this is >not allowed here. Do you show any evidence. No. >You try to provoke and try to make noise. > >I can live very good with you behaving this way ! :-)) > >> And you know dame well the things you say are a lie. > >Is this english you write ? Looks not like english. >My oxford dictionary says dame means something complete different :-)) > >>Just because you may out last Fritz or chess base or me or anyone else does not >>change the fact that you are a liar in this case. > >As I said. You seem to have a for next loop-. In the loop is the word liar ! >Repeat it if you think it is polite to call a member of your group liar. If I am wrong that you lied. Then have CCC delete this post for attacking you. If not shut up. You put yourself in the situation not me. I tell CCC right now that if Thorsten did not lie about fritz 5. a known lie where Thorsten himself set the standard of proof if he was truthful or not by saying ask moritz. And Mortiz said it did not happen the way Thorsten said. Then I will not call Thorsten a liar. But just say he is bias. If I am wrong delete the post and I will not protest. The lie was posted by Thorsten on CCC. And responded to by Moritz. It was Thorsten himself how gave me the right to call him a liar by himself setting the conditions if what he said was true of not.
This page took 0.02 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.