Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:08:56 09/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2002 at 06:49:30, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On September 22, 2002 at 02:13:47, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>On September 21, 2002 at 14:58:11, Chessfun wrote: >> >>>On September 21, 2002 at 10:59:04, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>> >>>>On September 21, 2002 at 10:30:10, Peter Skinner wrote: >>>> >>>>[snip] >>>> >>>>>I have a sinking feeling here that I am _not_ going to be the one that is >>>>>going to look foolish. >>>> >>>>Being sceptic about something because one doesn't have enough information and >>>>later see the proof it _is_ a new engine doesn't make you look foolish. (that's >>>>how science works by the way) Pretending to know something for sure (like that >>>>someone's cheating) without evidence and later be proven wrong does. >>>> >>>>Bob won't look foolish, however the Ruffian story turns out. You on the other >>>>hand might. >>> >>> >>>You're right Dr. Hyatt won't look foolish regardless how it turns out. I'm also >>>not so sure Peter will, he wrote what I believe many think and have implied. He >>>though had more courage then many by stating it exactly. >>> >>>Sarah. >> >>Thanks Sarah, >> >>I believe that is true. I wrote what surely others are thinking. I do not beat >>around the bush as they say. This is how I see it: >> >>A) We know _nothing_ about the author of this program. And I mean nothing. >>B) It's results are _to good_ for it to be a _new_ program. >>C) No previous results have ever been made public. Surely if the author was even >>scoring 50% against any commercial product we would have heard about it sooner. >>Currently it is scoring well above that. >>D) Trying to get information is like pulling teeth. No one can readily get >>information other than results. >>E) The author has not come forward to explain anything. Anyone that gets accused >>here of anything almost immediately comes forward to clear the air. This has not >>happened. Personally I don't think it will. >> >>There is simply to much doubt for me to believe that this is a _new_ program. >>Nor do I believe it is an original program. Possibly someone from this board can >>answer a few questions for me: >> >>1) What is the book format? >>2) How are the engine parameters set? Are they in an ini file? >>3) When executing the file, what does it say in the DOS window? >>4) What was the earliest date that Ruffian had any public results? >> >>I think those should be simple to answer. Hopefully someone can post answers. > >Easy answer, WAIT and look ... > >Best >Frank This is not an answer to 1-4. I do not have ruffian so I cannot answer but people who have Ruffian can do it(at least for 1-3). Uri
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.