Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:06:03 09/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 1998 at 02:32:41, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On September 11, 1998 at 21:43:46, Mark Young wrote: > >>Bruce, I would invite you and anyone else that would care to to please go >>through my thought process with me on a line by line basis with me and agree or >>disagree with it. My intention is not to deal in any way with implications >>against Thorsten but to just deal with the facts and if possible to come up with >>cause behind the facts. I think you might more clearly understand my intentions >>by doing this. > >I think that I understand this pretty well. You insinuate that Thorsten is >fiddling with the book. It'd be easy to do, it'd be hard to catch, and if you >saw low probability bad moves coming out of Fritz often enough, and you had >reason enough to believe that the operator had an ideological agenda, it might >even seem like the most likely explanation. > >I know that you, Enrique, Moritz, and maybe Dirk are frustrated by this >tournament. But let us try to figure out a way that we can handle this >situation constructively, without calling people cheaters this time around, and >without making posts where people are indirectly called cheaters. I don't think >this new strategy is much of an improvement over last time. > >I have done experiments with wide automatically generated books. It is hard to >write it properly, so that you don't go down bad lines. If the book is large, >which I expect Fritz's book is, this problem gets worse, not better. > >If you play a move based upon straight frequency, the odds are good that you'll >go down a rare line at least once in a game, and if the rare lines are all bad, >you're going to get screwed up a lot. As a possibly unrealistic example, if you >have a situation four times per game where you have a bad move played 10% of the >time along the line you play, the odds you will play a bad move at least once >are 1 - 0.9^4, which is about 35%. > >If you don't do it by straight frequency, but do it instead by result, you can >still have problems because you'll still go down bad lines sometimes. > >You said you looked at those games Fritz played, and analyzed the opening book >choices that Fritz made. What did you come up with? > >bruce Bruce stop putting words in my mouth. I called no one a cheater. Stop rewriting my posts!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If people agree with me that their seems to be a problem that because they can see the same things wrong with the games I see. Not because we think this is a good tactic to attack Thorston. I have posted my results on the games and openings, go back and look. Obviously you have not looked at the games, because you way understate the problem. I challenge you to take Fritz 5 and post here the moves and the percentages for the move in the opening book from Thorsten’s tournament. Then tell me I am way off base and there is no problem and this is just some tactic cooked up to attack Thorsten. You are a programmer and a computer chess expert. If you do this you will see the problem. If you don’t do this you need to stand down because you do not know what you are talking about in this case because you don’t know the facts. I don’t mean any disrespect to you, but for you to comment and make judgements on me you need to see and understand the facts by looking at the games.
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.