Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 09:46:34 09/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 2002 at 11:30:29, Thorsten Czub wrote: >Rolf Tüschen claims that i cheated when playing autoplayer games. >In fact he says that the openings have been chosen or selected, and that >i maybe preselected special games. > >This is a personal insult. > Wait a minute. Shall I get the personal insults you wrote to me? The last ones here again to these threads? Being ill, needing doctor and such nonsense? It's better than a satire what you are doing here. NB I didn't say that you cheated. I said that you were a creative tuner. And then what I said next, that was the following. I showed clearly that your roughly 30 games you reported - attention - _do not prove_ what they apparently shouldm that Rebel Macheide were stronger than Fritz or Shredder. Period. And now folks: Thorsten agreed with me on the judgement. He said that the game didn't prove anything. So far so good. But then my examples (I wrote about 5 games! out of 30) showed that Thorsten did not present his whole data but a pre-selected sample. For instance with 3 wins of Macheide Rebel against Shredder with the same opening blunder book line. Now all I am saying is that this doesn't prove that the style Macheide is anything because it can't prove it. Because Shredder was lost out of the opening. And not due to the play of anyone as opponent. So, I asked questions, this is what I did. I asked Thorsten how he could present such data. But he never replied with content. He preferred to fake a medical expert instead. Then yesterday Ed came and tried to defend his "tester". He wrote that everyone could pre-arrange data. SSDF and all. Then I showed that this wasn't possible because people would discover it. So far so good. Then "AB" explained to me that Thorsten is doing operator/program testings. Didn't interest me because we must see what Thorsten's intentions are. If he wants to find a style, then this is not testing and he can do what he wants. But then Thorsten is claiming now that he had posted data from tests and I had no right to criticise him for pre-arranging the data or wahtever. This goes too far now. It's one thing to insult "bean-counters" (that is the majority of all testers in CC) and to pretend to be a creative researcher/"tester" and then to claim that the chosen very small sample of data (NB that Thorsten tested from May 2002 until now Sept 2002 and all he had to show were 30 games!!!) should have the same respect as the many data from the other normal testers. This is impostering square *3. If I had to make my choice I would take all the "insulted as beancounter's results" data in the world before I would believe that the 30 games from Thorsten gave a complete overview of Thorsten's practice with Macheide. But that is so trivial that Thorsten shoud be able to understand it. The point of critic is not that Thorsten is doing things different to the normal testers, the point is, that Thorsten doesn't show his data and he doesn't explain either. All what he's trying to do is claiming that the thirty games proved that Macheide was stronger than the default Rebel. And all I did was to prove that Thorsten couldn't succeed with such unsound data. Thorsten tried a final trick. He asked me if I wanted that he should post not the data he had but data which I would find better, without these strange contents. No, I can only reply this, Thorsten should learn to present data without bias. When he does autoplay then he should post these games. And not only 30 games from May until September 2002 and for Shredder three lost games with the identical opening book blunder! I take for granted that all here in CCC have seen Thorsten's cabinet with the minimum of theree computers. So Thorsten had enough hardware to play many games in 4 months. Many more than roughly 30! What is insulting that is (besides Thorsten's own insulting of many here in CCC) his insinuation that the so-called beancounters did present useless data and that he could do it better. But the truth is that nobody knows what Thorsten is really doing, or what exactly he is presenting and what not. But then it's a hundred times better to have the other's data, where everybody can see what is game one in what match and of how many games. If SSDF presented such data Thorsten provided here, Thorsten would run amok. But since he's something better than just a bean-counter, he has the right to do what he wants. That is what he's saying. When people like me try to differentiate and reflect and ask questions, he comes and insults again because that is not computerchess in his eyes. God! May CC be protected against Thorsten, the better than mere bean-counter, who does nothing a all that could be analysed. And who runs into his insult-mode when someone tries to judge his practice. I close with this summary. Thorsten has all the right to do tunings the way he wants. But he can't force people to take his little data sample as if it were the usual data the defamed "beancounters" present. That would be the impossibility. The squaring of the circle as we say it in German. Rolf Tueschen
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.