Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I disagree

Author: Sandro Necchi

Date: 23:14:30 12/29/03

Go up one level in this thread


On December 29, 2003 at 13:43:18, Uri Blass wrote:

>On December 29, 2003 at 13:23:33, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>
>>On December 29, 2003 at 12:46:47, Luis Smith wrote:
>>
>>>>I do agree too.
>>>>
>>>>Crafty has no realistic chances to win a WCCC.
>>>>
>>>>Sandro
>>>
>>>IMO only Bob can know this for sure.  I think people either over estimate the
>>>commercials, or underestimate Crafty.  After all at the WCCC's only 11 games
>>>were played, who knows what could have happened in that time, especially with
>>>the kind of hardware that Dr. Hyatt could get.
>>
>>No, Bob does not know this.
>>He is a "little outdated" on this matter.
>>
>>At the 2003 WCCC there were 3 favorites (Shredder, Fritz and Junior), 2 possible
>>outsiders (Brutus and Diep).
>>
>>Based on my experience I gave these chances, before the tournament started:
>>
>>Shredder 35% (because of the slower hardware)
>>Fritz    30%
>>Junior   25%
>>Brutus    7%
>>Diep      3%
>>rest      0%

Hi Uri,

>
>I think that it is too risky to give 0% chances for all the rest when you do not
>know what the programmers did.

I amde "expectations" made on looking their previous games.

>How could you know that Deep Sjeng had no chances?
>After the tournament you know but not before it.

I did not know it. This was my expectation. I am not like R. Hyatt that is
attacking me only because I state my opinion which is different than his. I am
sorry, but that is my opinion.
I may be wrong.
I never said I know everything, he did.

I do not believe him!
>
>Did you know details about other programs like Jonny before the tournament?
>
>How could you know that all the single processors are going to lose when you do
>not know what the programmers did and you cannot be sure that nobody did
>something clearly better than shredder.
>
>You can guess that it is the case based on previous experience but you cannot be
>sure and I think that it is better to give at least 2% chances for some
>surprise.

To me thay had 0%. This was my opinion. Maybe I was wrong, but that's was my
opinion.
Can I have an opinion?

Sandro
>
>I agree that the 5 that you mention were the favourites before the tournament
>but the chances of other to win should be evaluated as at least 2%.
>
>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.