Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 10:39:19 09/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 2002 at 13:03:14, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >Rolf you are getting a bit carried away here, if shredder or it's book makes a >bad move you should not blame thorsten for it, the only thing you could argue >here is the validity of publishing such a game in terms of accuracy. > >BTW i have read your posts for a while now and it seems you are looking for >mistakes no matter who posts, do you have some past issues that was left >unfinished? > >Regards >Jonas I see that your question has a bad bias but I will try to answer your question - although it's totally off topic of course. But I will put it in the right context. Hope this helps. To give you a general answer, we should leave this specific thread here. And it's good to do it because what I do has nothing to do with Thorsten in particular but with what you observed very correctly. You write that I'm looking for 'mistakes' no matter who posts. So that is almost the truth. And I am thankful that you noticed that I did not go for particular posters. Because I never do that. But what is my interest then? You detected it but wrote it down in a bit biased fashion. I'm not looking for 'mistakes' others make. I had too much to do and in the end I had to correct myself too often! :) When you use the term mistake you are close to mean nitpicking and not far away, but of course not near too, the idea of Thorsten that I threw "mud" ans nothing else. This is both completely wrong. Perhaps I can explain you my intentions with concrete examples. Thorsten is now making propaganda about a new Macheide style for Rebel and he's doing it for months now. You know I am interested how Thorsten could achieve to put LASKER (!), the great Wch of human chess, into Rebel! And making Rebel stronger this way. Now I could believe Thorstens games and record, and also Ed's record. Then version 51 would be proven stronger. Period. That I could only check if I entered the autoplayer tests myself. But no one will ever get me into such things. I have my own reservation for the statistical activities in CC. You know perhaps my preference for the apples and beans motif. And I had a second method to take a closer look into the tests and tunings. I take a look into the games itself! And now I gave you a first impression. Almost every win with Black in Thorstens data Macheide Rebel wins against Shredder on P 400 because of Shredders book! As a scientist I know that the results can't prove that the tuning of Thorsten had this effect! I know that these wins mean nothing at all. And Thorsten has just confirmed that he has the same opinion!! I made that point and nothing else. Now the next question could be why Thorsten is presenting data with no meaning for his main intention. And more, when he knows it himself! Perhaps you can better understand me by now. Perhaps it would be much easier for you to understand me if you had my experience in science. Because there you should make sure that your new data should mean a thing! But in a hobby I would agree that it's not such great disaster. I confess that it's interesting to help people to understand the difference between disaster and good data. That's all. Don't let your Sunday being darkened by such worries. :) Rolf Tueschen
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.