Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 12:31:41 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2003 at 09:10:12, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >On February 21, 2003 at 08:44:14, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On February 21, 2003 at 08:33:18, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >> >>>On February 21, 2003 at 08:27:23, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>> >>>>On February 21, 2003 at 08:18:17, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>>>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 >> >>You're welcome. But if the three progs at the top are all the same qualified to >>be number one, then how should I be able to prove that one of the three is NOT >>qualified to be number one. That is simply called a contradiction/nonsense if I >>did try that. Oh well. Don't tell me that you didn't know all that. > >But now that we have established that all three could be number one and no >matter what we do, that uncertainty will always be there, then critiquing the >SSDF for inaccuaracy (when they don't claim to present accuracy) seems silly to >me. > >>Criticising is not insulting! Many people don't understand that. > >Including you, who took my critique for personal attacks. > > The question >>remains why someone must by all means continue to be faithful to a false method. > >Do you have a better method? > >>Here exactly we enter lobbyism and /or psychology. > >Or maybe they are just content with the way it is now. LOL.I never doubted it. But I think they pretend something they don't do. Their number one is not an independent result. - But look, I thought we had finished our exchange; to me this is worthless because you simply don't understand my points. Hey, as I said to the other guy here, believe what you want. Doesn't bother me. I try my best, then I try to explain where the mistakes are, but when I recognize that someone is mainly incabable because he has a certain agenda, here pro SSDF by all means or let's include ChessBase, then a real debate doesn't happen. And note I don't think you are stupid! You simply are not interested in theoretical debates while that is my only interest. I try to get the best result no matter whose interests are possibly touched. That is why some people don't like me. But personally I have nothing against other members here. Have a nice time here, Rolf Tueschen > >Jonas
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.