Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Second example for a bad opening of the opponent in the tuning of Rebel

Author: Thorsten Czub

Date: 14:05:09 09/15/02

Go up one level in this thread


On September 15, 2002 at 13:39:19, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>Perhaps I can explain you my intentions with concrete examples.
>
>Thorsten is now making propaganda

i am not doing propaganda. this is a word from nazi germany.
i don't want to be associated with goebbels (propaganda-minister)
or any other nazi. please stop saying i am doing propaganda.



>about a new Macheide style for Rebel and he's
>doing it for months now.

right. it took so long.
i invented the style for century4. the idea was to make
rebel century play more dynmaic.

than ed made rebel XP.
i was completely disapointed about the positional style of the default
engine. this was very heavy to see in games against
fritz.

therefore i tried to bring my style (that worked for century4)
and adapt it for rebel XP.

this took time.
as rebel XP is very different to rebel century4.


>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.

if you want to know, why don't you refer to the article that is on my
web site for "months" ?
why don't you write me an email if this article is not to your satisfaction ?

because you are INTERESTED sooooo much ?



>As
>a scientist

:-)))

very funny rolf.


>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!!

as a scientist, you should know that statistics need to publish the data.
no matter if the opponent died for falling from the chair or because the power
supply was not working.


>I made that point and nothing else.

really ?


>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!

as a scientist you should know why.

>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.


oh man.


> 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.

a point is a point. if you would have ever played in a tournament such a WCCC
you would know that the win is important.





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.