Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Stefan Mayer-Kahlen comments on his victory...

Author: Chesster Fritz

Date: 05:37:04 01/14/04

Go up one level in this thread


On January 14, 2004 at 04:47:08, Rolf Tueschen wrote:

>On January 13, 2004 at 19:05:23, Chesster Fritz wrote:
>
>>On January 13, 2004 at 14:31:38, Rolf Tueschen wrote:
>>
>>>On January 13, 2004 at 10:59:52, Steve Maughan wrote:
>>>
>>>>Martin,
>>>>
>>>>>translated this means about this: "fritz and shredder played the best chess in
>>>>>this tournament (he is comparing against junior and brutus), and won their
>>>>>games against the outsiders most easily" - i don't really mind the first part
>>>>>of this sentence, but the second part is really hilarious given the shredder-
>>>>>jonny incident!
>>>>
>>>>I don't really want to start up the whole Graz scandle thread but in the Jonny
>>>>game Shredder was easily winning.
>>>
>>>Pardon me, you mean easily winning? And why SHREDDER didn't win (easily)? Why
>>>had it won with the aid of someone who threw a whole game although it was a
>>>draw? Could you explain your position? If you are a chessplayer yourself, could
>>>you reflect your position in relation to possible cases of a PATT or THREEFOLD?
>>>Would you dare to say that such draws are not existing because they are most
>>>unfair to the side which has a won game????
>>>
>>>Do you mean that if you call something a "bug", that then this is like
>>>'unimportant' or 'non-existent'?
>>>
>>>So, if I allow a draw by a PATT for instance, that then I couzld say that I had
>>>a bug and then I would still be judged as an extremely strong player? And my
>>>opponents would throw their game just to let me wi??? Where is this being
>>>played. Please tell me exact address.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>The scandle occured due to a bug in Shredder.
>>>> So if SMK is commenting on the general quality of chess played by the programs
>>>>(which he seems to be) I don't really have a problem and I think he's correct.
>>>>
>>>
>>>The "general" quality of the chess is something SMK is completely impotent to
>>>judge. SMK has no chess master status whatsoever. Probably he's a good
>>>businessman as Daniel pointed out, but his thought process is really biased
>>>heavily. Please do not speak of chess in general if you talk about the actual
>>>computerchess with BOOKS and TABLES, which is cheating after the FIDE Laws.
>>>
>>>Rolf
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Steve
>>
>>
>>BTW SMK is a certified Chess Master.
>
>Pure fantasy! He's not a master, of course.
>
>Rolf
>
He's rated at 2250 or thereabouts. What you have to say on the matter is of no
consequence. I stated a fact, no amount of smoke from you will obscure that
fact.

I notice you have a problem taking in information. This must have been
enormously frustrating for your teachers, when you were a child.
It's a pity you have such a learning disability.

Fritz
>
>
>>Again you're just blowing smoke.
>>
>>The only impotence I see is your addle-minded ramblings.
>>
>>Fritz



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.