Author: Uri Blass
Date: 11:18:19 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 13:36:26, Manfred Meiler wrote: >On August 21, 2002 at 11:12:38, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 21, 2002 at 10:08:51, Manfred Meiler wrote: >> >>>On August 21, 2002 at 05:58:25, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On August 21, 2002 at 01:42:07, Mike S. wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 20, 2002 at 17:25:43, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>(...) >>>>>>No reason to be surprised. >>>>>>This test was designed to put Fritz on top because the analysis was done by >>>>>>Fritz to decide about the positions. >>> > >>>>> >>>>>What exactly do you mean? >>>>> >>>>>Do you really mean, "designed to put Fritz on top"? If not - and I assume (and >>>>>hope) you didn't mean that - then I suggest to be a bit more careful. Now it >>>>>sounds like an accusation. >>> > >>>> >>>>I mean that the testers used Fritz to analyze >>>>before deciding about the positions. >>>> >>>>Vincent said that when he asked about a position they gave him Fritz's analysis >>>>as a proof. > > >>> >>> >>>Mr. Blass, >>> >>>how do you know so exactly in which way this test suite was designed ? >> >>I admit that I do not know. > > >MM: >Oh,I see ! ... > > >>The only guess that I made is that they did their computer analysis with Fritz >>before deciding about the positions. > > >MM: >And your guess is only based on the mentioned statement of Mr. Diepeveen ? >Rather strange ... > > >> >>I did not mean to say that they planned to put Fritz as number 1. >> >> >>>Where's the proof for your statement above ? >>>Only the fact that Mr. Diepeveen has got Fritz's analysis as a proof from the >>>test authors Michael Gurevich and Heinz-Josef Schumacher ? That would be >>>ridiculous... >>> >>>Do you really believe that the authors Mr. Gurevich and Mr. Schumacher worked >>>almost two years (altogether) in designing this large test suite only to put >>>Fritz on top ? >> >>I did not say that this was their target. > > >MM: >I quote your statement from above: >"No reason to be surprised. <b>This test was designed to put Fritz on top </b> >because the analysis was done by Fritz to decide about the positions." > >Maybe my english is really too bad but: >If words still make sense then ... >in german: "Wenn Worte noch einen Sinn machen, dann ..." >But please judge yourself. 1)English is also not my first language so there can be misunderstanding. 2)I agree that it was a mistake to assume that they used Fritz to decide about the test positions without knowing the facts(it is not the same as deciding that Fritz is going to be best see 3) 3)Using analysis by Fritz to decide about the positions does not mean deciding that Fritz is going to be the best because other engines that you did not use in the analysis can still be faster but this is not the best way to decide if to accept a position that is a candidate to be a test position. The point is that in that case Fritz may have an advantage because positions that Fritz has no idea about because of lack of positional understanding cannot be included in the test when positions that Fritz understands and other programs do not understand can be included. Uri
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.