Author: Mark Young
Date: 19:24:14 02/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 05, 2003 at 21:46:54, George Wilson wrote: >On February 05, 2003 at 21:01:40, Michael Vox wrote: > >>I wonder if Hyattian theory has any insight into this matter ? > > > Hyattian theory is Dead and Buried!, He has been publicly shown to be in Error >in two crucial matters, 1. computers are not grandmasters 2. and that deepblue >was stronger then Current programs. Two false theories shown to be foolish and >unreasonable. Currently the defroked professor post seldomly or hides behind >technical issues , rarely these days does he make any statements about >controversial issues he has been proven to be wrong at. I was one of the main opponents to Dr. Hyatt’s theory. I argued strongly against his belief that computer were not "GM’s" in strength. Saying that I feel your comments are unfair. I don’t see anything wrong with posting what you believe to be correct, or arguing strongly for your ideas. I for one do not think that Dr Hyatt’s theory was foolish, or unreasonable, Dr Hyatt was just in error in this matter, but right in so many other areas when it comes to computer chess. I always read what Dr. Hyatt post as I learn a great deal from them.
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.