Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 14:38:42 09/16/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 16, 2002 at 17:01:13, Dann Corbit wrote: >On September 16, 2002 at 15:53:06, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >[snip] >>NB please that I did never say he faked or cheated data. All I said was: These >>30 games including the five games I posted could_not_ show something relevant >>about this styled Rebel. > >What then, was the meaning of the thread title: >"How people could detect if a game was cooked?" > >Sounds like an accusation to me. Certainly in the context of the material you >posted, I do not see how it could be interpreted otherwise. >[snip] I'm a bit astonished by such a tone here, Dann. Now I must explain the English meaning to you. It's sad. To answer your question I remind you of the point that I originally _thought_ that Thorsten posted or quoted the games, because they should "prove" or show that the created new style played "stronger" than the default version. My question was if such games, my 5 examples, could do that successfully. I thought 'No'! If you doubt my original opinion then why these games were posted at all? They stood in context of Thorsten's claim that his style was stronger against Shredder ans so on. But the games don't prove it. I found that the games contained a cook against Shredder. Explanation: because the Shredder book contained the weak line. What should this prove about the Macheide style??? Nothing IMO. I asked a scientifically interesting (for me!!) question how people, I meant all, could detect such cookes games in testing. Because it made the tests weaker by definition! (Would you now doubt my scientific interest I showed from my first posting on? Either about SSDF or the DB2 team.) Note that I did NOT think that _Thorsten_ cooked these games!!!! They are cooked because of the opening book. And I thought I had made a valuable _discovery_. Just by playing through the lines. I found the examples. Please do not lay bad intentions into my mouth when they definitely are not there! Of course I thought that it was a bad thing for Thorsten to post these games, but I did never even _insinuate_ that he tried to _cheat_ with them. For what purpose should he have done it??? I repeat I found the cooks and asked a question "how people could detect such cooks". Please stop pushing me in corners where my honest questions should look like the insults, Thorsten read in them. There are no insults! Please give a short correction here if it's understood by now what the meaning was. Thank you. It's important for me because Thorsten already wrote about my intentions to destroy and so on. This is most insultive for me. 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.