Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 05:33:18 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2003 at 08:27:23, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 21, 2003 at 08:18:17, Jonas Cohonas wrote: > >>Everest is exactly as high as it is no matter what statistics say, > >You have no knowledge about the difficulties to measure under extreme >conditions. Otherwise you would NOT write such a statement. > > > >>but there is >>no way of accurately stating who is the number 1 prog at any time because of the >>statistical inaccuracies involved, the SSDF never claimed that whoever tops >>their list is the strongest prog out there in general (not to my knowledge >>atleast). > > >Here you fall back to the other nonsese again. I already answered the delusion. >The delusion that when you do not talk about strength that then the SSDF did the >right thing. And that exactly is false. > > >> >>If you could write an elo calculating program that is better than what the SSDF >>use, then by all means go ahead. >> >>BTW can you prove that Shredder is not number 1?, beyond any shadow of a doubt >>that is. > > >Yes I can. Look, the three progs at the top are eqally qualified for number one. >Here is my decision. Fritz has less letters for the same performance so Fritz is >number one. > > >:) > :) Thanks for the answer. Jonas
This page took 0.01 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.