Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:56:04 02/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2003 at 13:47:39, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 23, 2003 at 11:59:41, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On February 23, 2003 at 08:43:25, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>On February 23, 2003 at 08:38:04, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>> >>>>Right. >>> >>> >>>:) >>> >>>25 y. after the End of Cold War TC comes back into the arms of ChessBase... >>> >>>Now there is only one last independant - Rolf. All others are either retired or >>>in the Royaume. >>> >>>:) >> >> >>Ed gehört mit zu den Fähigkeiten des Menschen die Leistung eines anderen >>anzuerkennen. Fritz hat verdient gewonnen. >>Es war auch an der Zeit dafür. >> >>Ein tolles Turnier. Spannend. Lehrreich. Einfach schön. >> >>Kein Grund ins Sektierertum zu verfallen. >> >>Starke Programme sind en masse vorhanden. Es macht nur nicht jeder darauf >>aufmerksam. > > >Yes, I know, the actual hardware makes it almost impossible for a program not to >be good today! For the benefit of the level of this club I wished to read a >sound explanation why a prog like COMET, with such an experience, could be so >weak? Comet is not so weak. I can give you a lot of names of programs that are weaker: Ant,Metedor,Monarch,Gerbil,Tscp,Nero,Betsy,Fortress,Armagadon,Cyberpagno,Gaviota,Esc,Movei.... Comet is better than big majority of the free programs. Nothing against its author, I could ask the same for PATZER. I mean today >we have progs whose author does some three month work and the program is a GM! How do you know the time that the author works on them? The author may work secretely about the program for years. 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.