Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:21:41 11/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2003 at 05:32:12, Amir Ban wrote: >On November 20, 2003 at 23:57:50, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On November 20, 2003 at 19:21:56, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>I guess if Crafty were given knight odds it would also have a fair chance at >>>winning, but what exactly does that prove ? >> >>Come on Amir... >> >>Do you really believe that winning the WCCC with superior hardware is on par >>with winning the WCCC when given knight odds? >> >>I thought the WCCC was about finding out what was the best chess playing >>computer, hardware and software combination. > >Bob didn't say "I can get better hardware than you guys". He said "If I come >with big hardware and you don't, I can beat you". > >This is the same as needing a handicap to compete. No it isn't, because I didn't say that in the first place. I said bigger hardware _increases_ my chance to win. And since the WCCC is "open hardware" that would be legal. I notice you now have a parallel search. Of course, your using a quad is not a big advantage over those that don't, right? I mean you wouldn't write a parallel search to get a hardware _advantage_ over someone, would you? That's what I thought. So, back to the statement "what US program(s) could challenge for the WCCC title?" The answer is "I can name one, using good hardware, that would _definitely_ challenge." That is _all_ that I said... I'll play in a uniform platform event. I win my share that way as well... > >Any claim to having the best software/hardware combination had better be backed >with something, like playing. I do it _all_ the time... > >Amir
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.