Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 15:27:05 02/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2003 at 17:14:35, Chris Carson wrote: >These two pertain to your "acusation", I have many more published articles in >Tech Journals and Health Publications and have completed a Ph.D and Professional >Licensure. You have flaunted that Ph.D. before without much success. There's more to analysis of results than ad-hoc guesswork and fiddling with a stats program as you mentioned previously. A method appropriate to getting the right results every time. >"This is what makes it an opinion as opposedto indisputable fact. If you have a >different opinion, then fine, but please refrain from stating chicken logic. >Thanks in advance." That didn't concern the question posed. But rather the obvious fact that it isn't enough for one low rated GM to beat a chess program as proof, ie. chicken logic. >Perhaps your statement pertains to your "opinion"? Just to remind you. There were three issues: Would it be possible for low ranked GM to perform as well as Kasparov and Kramnik with the same match conditions, ie. having a copy beforehand? My opinion is that the answer cannot be a resounding "no" based on current data, eg. the games plyed in the aforementioned matches. Then I added a couple of personal opinions: 1) Whether it would be possibly for low ranked GMs to compete without special preparation. That is debatable, which I also stated. 2) That the most interesting scientific question would be the naked engine vs. mankind to put it simply. That is of course also a matter of opinion. >What are your qualifications? A math and physics degree. Regards, Mogens
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.