Author: Victor Fernandez
Date: 05:02:30 09/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2002 at 07:28:01, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 22, 2002 at 07:14:44, Frank Quisinsky wrote: > >>On September 22, 2002 at 07:05:46, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 22, 2002 at 06:52:18, Victor Fernandez wrote: >>> >>>You give no new information about Ruffian. >>> >>>Uri >> >>Hi Uri, >> >>where is your problem with a work from an other programmer. >>The Ruffian programmer say not ... please stop to write about "Movai". >> >>Bad message Uri, very bad message! >> >>Best >>Frank > >I did not say not to write about Ruffian. > >My complain was that the title says more about ruffian and I get no more >information from reading the content. > >The fact that it has good result is not new so the speculation that top >programmers will work harder is not surprising(I am not sure about it because >they may also give up chess). > >The claim that Ruffian is not bad in endgame is also speculation(I do not know >what bad means but people can look at the games and decide)_ Uri, it is not speculation, it is a simple syllogism. Shredder plays the endings very well A program that it score versus Shredder it cannot be weak in endings Ruffian it is not weak in endings Prove the opposite. Victor
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.