Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:10:15 05/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2004 at 12:28:40, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On May 01, 2004 at 11:26:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 01, 2004 at 07:21:59, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>>On May 01, 2004 at 05:21:08, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> >>>>On May 01, 2004 at 05:04:54, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 04:33:59, Sune Fischer wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 01, 2004 at 00:58:02, Uri Blass wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 30, 2004 at 22:44:40, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Diep is now in the #3 programs >>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362447 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>And Falcon is a Grandmaster strength program about 2700 ELO. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>And assuming "Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% >>>>>>>>against Falcon in my tests" >>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362348 we can therefore assume >>>>>>>>it's #2 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>That leaves Shredder 8 at #1. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Lucky both the #2 and #3 program are neither for sale or available else some may >>>>>>>>even report they are #1 ;-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I would suggest to both programmers that they get a good team of beta testers >>>>>>>>and start posting game scores and results that would be deemed realistic. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sarah. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>At least in the case of Falcon the programmer did not claim that it is one of >>>>>>>the top 3 engines. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>He used the Fritz8's book for Falcon in his tests and he even did not claim that >>>>>>>in these conditions Falcon is better than Fritz or Junior. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Shredder 8 is the only engine that consistently scores above 50% does not mean >>>>>>>that Deep Fritz8 or Junior8 cannot do it but only that they did not do it in all >>>>>>>of his tests. >>>>>> >>>>>>"Consistently" is not a mathematical word :) >>>>>> >>>>>>So it depends how you read "winning consistently", it could mean just winning on >>>>>>average, or it could mean it wins all the time ie. never losing or even drawing. >>>>>> >>>>>>I think the latter is too strong, ie. if you have the match results >>>>>>60-40, 55-45, 89-11, 48-52, 61-39.... >>>>>> >>>>>>I'd still say one engine here is winning consistently, ie. it is who wins on >>>>>>average that is the most obvious interpretation. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>see http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362354 >>>>>winning consistently means that usually Shredder win a match of 4 games. >>>> >>>>Yes and the example also says that Falcon usually scores around 50% against >>>>Fritz. >>>> >>>>>Of course it is not well defined and the question how you read usually but I >>>>>will say that it means more than 50% of the matches. >>>>> >>>>>If Fritz wins 40% of the matchs of 4 games when Falcon wins 30% >>>>>of these matchs then Fritz does not beat Falcon consistently inspite of the fact >>>>>that it is slightly better by that definition >>>> >>>>Yeah this might have been what he meant, it didn't quite come off like that. >>>>Omid also saw people that people were misunderstanding it, and he didn't do >>>>anything to correct those that read it to being as strong as Fritz. >>> >>>People seem to be reading anything they want into anything posted. I originally >>>posted that Shredder is the strongest engine, and look at all the nonsense >>>people have started. Why disturb the fun? >>> >>> >>>> >>>>So once and for all, Omid, could you be more specific so we can lay this to >>>>rest? >>> >>>I have already been specific as to what I meant: >>> >>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362354 >>> >>>I measure the imrovement of Falcon not with a series of long matches against a >>>specific engine, but by conducting gauntlet matches against 15 programs, 4 >>>matches with each (using equal hardware, one processor, equal books, etc). While >>>Shredder 8 repeatedly scores more than 50% in the 4 games, Fritz and Junior >>>sometimes end up with more than 2 points out of 4, and sometimes with less. >>> >> >> >>The above is pure nonsense. I suggest the following: >> >>1. If English is not your native language, and you can't write in English and >>make it clear what you are trying to say, _DON'T WRITE_ in English. >> >>2. If English is a language you understand, then stop writing such nonsensical >>things. For example: >> >>"Shredder is the only program that consistently beats Falcon" has a very precise >>meaning to a native English-speaker. Namely that all other programs can not >>beat it consistently, which clearly means that Falcon beats the other programs >>consistently or else draws many matches (but it still must win or draw more than >>it loses for the sentence to remain consistent). >> >>"If they thought they could win, they would come" has only one interpretation no >>matter how much you try to twist and spin the meaning of each word. "if they >>thought they could win, they would come" is a statement of fact. Which _does_ >>imply "they didn't come, so they didn't think they could win." Any attempt to >>twist that is just nonsense. >> >>I'll leave you with a well-known proverb: >> >>"it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth >>and remove all doubt." >> >>Whether your statements are intentionally misleading or not doesn't matter. >>They _are_ misleading. And they are not credible. >> >>That's all there is to it. >> > >Feel free to shoot in the air as much as you want. I clearly said what I meant >at http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?362677. > So you _really_ find it impossible to be honest and straightforward and simply say "Fritz beats me more games than I beat it. Ditto for Junior and the other top commercial programs..." And you want to hang on semantics that can be interpreted as favorable to your results, while (again) trying to weasel out of the normal and usual interpretation any sane person would make of your statement? Your inability to fix this is worse than your originally making such a statement in the first place... > > > > >> >> >> >>>But who cares what I meant, let's continue the fun here :) >> >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>-S. >>>>>Uri
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.