Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Comments on SSDF by Mr.Diepeveen

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 11:46:46 03/05/04

Go up one level in this thread


On March 05, 2004 at 14:42:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On March 05, 2004 at 14:30:38, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On March 05, 2004 at 12:30:43, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On March 05, 2004 at 10:29:16, Bob Durrett wrote:
>>>
>>>If you scroll back in CCC archives you will find GCP from Sjeng, who tried to
>>>figure out why Sjeng was beated so much by CCC users. He substantiated his claim
>>>that the UCI in fritz8 was putting back the hashtable from game 2 and further to
>>>1MB for DeepSjeng.
>>>
>>>Is that enough for you, or do you need confirmation at the chessbase homepage?
>>
>>That has nothing to do with the SSDF and everything to do with ChessBase.
>>
>>If you have a bug in your program, is the SSDF responsible for that also?
>>
>>Of course, the SSDF will make mistakes, like any organization run by people.
>>
>>But the data produce by the SSDF is better than the data produced by any other
>>chess ranking body, includig FIDE and the USCF.  IMO-YMMV.
>
>The SSDF is not there to correct their mistakes. Majority of what they play is
>not published, so we can *never* check the amount of mistakes made.

The old games are lost.  The new games are published.  You can find them here:
http://home.interact.se/~w100107/welcome.htm

What games are missing that were played in the last year or so?

>We only know 1 tester from SSDF is transparant.

What do you mean?  I do not understand that statement.
I think Tony and Bertil do lots of posts in this forum, but maybe the others
just don't post much online.

And I do not think activity in this or other forums should have any connection
to the quality of the data.



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.