Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 10:55:33 05/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 2003 at 13:28:06, David H. McClain wrote: >Thorsten, > >I thought it was just me but I have played against Chessmaster 9000 with >autoplay. So this excuse is not valid. they will always find an excuse. just search long enough and you will find one. > As far as I am concerned the SSDF >tables do not have much credibility right now. they would be reliable if the people in charge would organise the setting in a fair and clear way. as long as they do whatever they want, whenever they want and without any clear rules and definitions the list is a joke made for people who want to have fun. i would not say they have no credibility. i would say they do the best not to measure precise enough. all the hours of testing, machine power and electricity, and then anything gets destroyed because you organise it wrong. how can one accept that 2 very strong programs don't get tested ? consider a car race and both schumacher brothers would not be allowed to drive into the contest ! or you have a tennis match and agassi and becker are not allowed to play. > I don't disagree with their >evaluations of all the tested programs but the absence of Chessmaster 9000 after >it appeared last September is simply unimaginable. i see it the same. and i can tell you more "strange misunderstandings". >It would be like evaluating all the great automobiles of the world and leaving >out Mercedes Benz. e.g. ! yes.
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.