Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 02:12:43 09/11/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2002 at 20:22:21, Chessfun wrote: >Well lucky for us you managed to sort out the two wins by Black for 51. >I assume they must have been consecutive else you'd have posted the other games. >Well actually they weren't consecutive as they were on different machines and >both apparently never autoplayed a 2nd game. ?? when the autoplayer crashes, i do edit the files and copy the chessbase files into Hiarcs7.32 GUI to get readable PGN's. i do this when i have the time and do not need further autoplay. when i change something, or want to do it, i create a new style. no matter how many games the style before played. changing a style is done to find out about the opponent and about the program itself. in opposite to you i do not make statistics and lists, instead it is a creative process, like testing a chess program. i am not the kind of book-keeper or bean-counter type of guy. This seems to be something for you , you cannot realize. when you be creative, you are not bean-counting. this destroys creativity. so i will bean count when the next interrupt, the next stage in the process comes. >That isn't what you've been arguing all day long. >Quote; "there are no PGN i did not post."....opps seems you overlooked some. >So then 51 didn't only play two games as black and win them.....right? i did not overlooked some. the games have been played. but i have not counted them. i have not made the books straight so far since the machine crashed and i wanted to find out WHICH part in the style of 51 made the result and games so good. with 56 i came back to the original style (51) and changed a pruning switch. with 57 the same. now i have to collect (generate) data to find out which pruning is better. as long as i am not finished with collecting, i do not count. i do not trasnfer into readable PGN, i do have NO idea what the statistics are. so the games are "not played" so far. the data is on the HDD , but i have not looked into the statistics. i have seen the games. but not the ones played over night. >A day. Indicating you have finished with this personality despite scoring 2-0-0. >But as you say above now apparently it did play more games......seems you've >changed your mind from earlier. i do not change my mind. i did not looked / count the games so far. you don't understand how it works. if somebody is a bean-counter like you, you count all the day. you sit behind those machines when they are ready and count. i count when the work is done, and have stages where i watch and do not concentrate on statistics. when this process is over, i do stop the autoplayers and browse through the files full of garbage and copy/paste the games into readable PGN. >Wasn't commented towards you was it?.. Seems your paranoia took over. it was posted beneath my post. i first thought you have a computerchess comment to make, when in fact i forgot that you never give a computerchess comment that qualifies something. you almost ever give comments that quantify something. i will not make the mistake again to click on your "comments" about coffee and stuff like this. its wasted time. you have nothing to say other than 6.4. >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.