Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 02:45:38 10/31/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 2003 at 04:27:54, Luis Smith wrote: >>I have to agree with your criticism. I was delighted to see the SSDF initiative, >>but this is the wrong way of doing things and it does more harm than good. It's >>better not to test this wonderful chess program than doing it this way. > >I disagree. > >What do you mean by "It's better not to test this wonderful chess program than >doing it this way."? Do you mean because of the book? I saw no one crying >"unfair" when Crafty used general.ctg. Besides the book must be 2-3 years old >by now, and I am sure everyone has already optimized against it. Perhaps Johan >can grab a few PGN's and let SSDF make it into a book? Would that satisfy all >that critics? The SSDF policy is out-of-the-box testing, everything else is wrong. Own book, own learner stuff. This only represents the true strength of a program. >>Suppose CM9000 will top the list in the next edition then I foresee the longest >>thread in the history of CCC. Suppose it does real bad it will cause a similar >>stir. >I disagree here also, when they announced the testing of it there wasn't as much >of a stir as I thought there would be. There might be a few "Yays!" or "Johan >is the greatest programmer ever" but I don't think it will cause much of a >rutkus. Well, tell me if you want to put your money on it and how much :) >>Unfortunately good intentions not always guarantee wise decisions, perhaps we >>have pressured them too much. >Perhaps so, at one time I thought SSDF was an organization who only had >Chessbase products top the list. Now seeing that they are testing TheKing 3.23 >especially with SKR settings they have shown they have different intentions. Agreed, that's the good part, it shutdowns the conspiracy theorists. My best, Ed
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.