Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 04:36:06 02/15/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2003 at 07:24:22, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 15, 2003 at 07:18:22, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On February 15, 2003 at 05:11:09, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >> >>>On February 14, 2003 at 07:10:40, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>> >>>>We are told that for instance the two first programs are seperated by 8 points. >>>>No matter Stefan get all the credits here for his first place. But is true that >>>>Shredder is stronger than Fritz? >>>> >>>>Here I must tell you that we simply don't know it. The SSDF pretend to know it, >>> >>>False. The SSDF simply states that Shredder is #1 in its recent ranking list. >>>Nothing more, nothing less. What you make of it, is up to you. >> >>Wrong. What you call SSDF simply states, exactly this is object of my critic. In >>fact I say that SSDF cannot state (on the base of its _own_ results!) that >>Shredder 7 is number one. Nothing more nothing less. >> >>Rolf Tueschen > >They can state that Shredder7 is number 1 in the rating list. >They did not state that shredder7 is better than Deep Fritz7. > >There is a difference between these claims and I expect intelligent people to >understand. Uri, it would help a lot if you would take a look into some stats readers. I am not inventing opinions, I am talking about simple basics, laymen often forget. That is also why it is not possible to adopt a certain routine out of the context of a whole method and then do some calculations and whoopie preseting the winner. I repeat the actual results - given in the list itself - does NOT allow to present Shredder as number one. Also: if SSDF understood what they were doing they had done a presentation of the sort 1.-3. are... Then Shredder could well be named in the first place. 1.-3. Shredder, Fritz, Fritz Rolf Tueschen > >Uri > >Uri
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.