Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 19:55:36 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2003 at 18:00:04, Bertil Eklund wrote: >On February 20, 2003 at 17:04:44, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>>>>>>>"Boris Alterman dismissed a version that won big against a well-known SSDF star >>>>>>>>as being based on nothing more than cheap tactics, and recommended a version >>>>>>>>based on a match that it actually lost". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>This is of course absolute nonsense and probably a pure lie. Of course it is >>>>>>>only a way to say that it is weaker then the other top-engines and we hope to >>>>>>>sell it on the merits of the Kasparov match. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Bertil >> >>This comment was _way_ over the top, Bertil. > >So you just swallowed it!? He crushed a top-program with "cheap tactics" but he >choosed another version that lost. It was only good in sicilian but won 30 to 20 >in a 50 game match. In the next sentence he says that the top programs on the >list are weak positionally (meaning that they must be very strong tactically) >Other programs are much better positionally, no examples. > >Bertil He relayed an anecdote. If a crime occured, I missed it. Dave
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.