Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 16:41:18 02/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2003 at 18:27:05, Mogens Larsen wrote: >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. Have you a job in one of the two or are you a teacher? Rolf Tueschen > >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.