Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:02:11 10/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 04, 2003 at 16:48:26, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >On October 04, 2003 at 16:15:57, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 04, 2003 at 15:26:19, Arturo Ochoa wrote: >> >>>>You may be right but what rating list are you talking about. >>>>Movei play in a lot of tournaments of winboard program and I never saw results >>>>of Mridul there. >>>> >>> >>>Maybe, you dont know what he is talking about as always. The Mridul´s engine is >>>a private engine. First, you should ask what is the status of this engine. >> >>There are private engines that are in tournament that movei participates. >>most of the engines are not private but not all of them. >> >>I can give one example cerebro is playing in Loe's tournament and is private >>engine. > >You have a big problem of understanding what I meaning for. Who are talking >about Cerebro or the Leo D´s Tournaments? > >I said: You should ask what the status of this engine is? I responded to Vincent "In case you missed it, Messchess is way higher rated than movei." I asked about rating list because I do not know about rating for Messchess. > >> >>Latest movei is also not public and the public version is significantly weaker. >> >>The status of the engine is irrelevant to the fact that I know nothing of its >>results. >> > >Good, the point is not if your engine is private or not private is also >irrelevant. Yes, the status of the Mridul´s is relevant because his goal is >another kind of Tournaments and he doesnt have to demostrate in front of you >anything, considering that your statements are weeak and circumstancial. I said nothing about the level of Mridul so I do not see how can it prove something about my statements. Uri > >>I like more tournament in the internet. >>equal hardware when comparing based on rating in chess servers or in tournaments >>is comparing when the programs do not have equal hardware. > >This is not a fact, it just another irrelevant thing to the topic. What you >think about the Internet Tournament is not the core of the topic. Why do you >always tourn aside the highaway instead of going to the core of the topic? Why >to avoid this using other circumtancial and irrelevants issues? Is is so >difficult to order your ideas so the people can understand what you are >pretending? > > > >> >>I think that a fair tournament should at least allow programs to use machines >>with the same price and it should not be a tournament of the people who have >>more money. >> >>I find it unfair when one program use 500 processors and another program does >>not use the best hardware that it can use for the same price. >> >>I do not find it unfair when one program use more than one processor and another >>program does not do it because parallel search is part of the work of the >>programmer but money is not part of the work of the programmer so I think that >>all programs should get the best machine that they can use for the same >>price(otherwise the tournament is unfair). >> >> > >All these sentences are circumstancial and dont answer to my idea. Could you >order your ideas without difiiculty and complexity? In one sentence: I think that in a fair tournament programs should use the same hardware or the best hardware that they can use under some price. > >I find very funny this arguments. Ahh, they are just asumptions based on what? >What you believe? Good, who can rely on this? I do not understand what you mean. > > > > >> >> >>> >>>>Note that the programmer told me that he did not mean to offend me so there is >>>>no problem with him. >>>> >>>>There are problems with you because you always try to offend other people(not >>>>only me). >>> >>>You are not a different exception because you always think that you have the >>>reason with a prominent arrogance. >> >>If you talk about the fact that I believe that I may do something better than >>Crafty without using hash tables for pruning then it is still different than >>saying that Crafty's evaluation is primitive. >> >>I can agree that it may be better not to say what I believe about the future but >>saying "your evaluation is primitive" is clearly worse than saying "I believe >>that I can do better than you or even saying that you already have something >>better". >> >>I did not claim that it is easy to do a better evaluation than Crafty like >>vincent claimed when he claimed that the evaluation of Crafty is one day work. >> >>Uri > >Again, the topic is not other topic. All this stuff is circumtancial and >irrelevant. Could you focus on the topic? You said: "you always think that you have the reason with a prominent arrogance." I admit that I did not understand what do you mean and it seems that I guessed wrong. Uri
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.