Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: How do you know ....

Author: Manfred Meiler

Date: 05:47:44 06/12/04

Go up one level in this thread


(...)
>It's a desaster how you and Gurevich treat a critic like Hagra. Your own data
>are thought to be beyond any critic but if someone gives his own data then it
>can be doubted??


No, my own data are of course not "thought to be beyond any critic".
But if someone interpret them apparent wrong (as "on weaker hardware AMD 1400
Fritz 8.0.0.23 does never change to Rad8 because it can't go deep as 12") then
it should be allowed to me to clarify this by posting concrete analyse lines of
Fritz 8.0.0.23 on AMD 1400 in this test position. Don't you think?



Where did you learn such a logic? And what is it if Gurevich,
>yes, he's an academic doctor, I know, that before one criticises one should
>"ask" before? Where did the doctor learn such a nonsense? A critic is a question
>itself. And it should be answered with respect. A critic is NOT an insult or
>disrespect. A critic is the only tool to make progress.
>
>Hagra did find opposing data to yours and I too. But you are not interested in
>differing data. You are more behaving like a clerical who wants to exert his
>power in a debate about the correct view. But this is not possible in field that
>is more connected to science.
>
>Please show your critics some respect because they have done a similar work you
>liked to do. Yours isn't worthier as such only because your name is aleways
>mentioned with the one of Gurevich.


I never claimed that my own data (work) are worthier than other one's.
Yesterday I wrote in CSS forum
(http://f23.parsimony.net/forum50826/messages/100864.htm):
"Ich behaupte (natürlich) nicht, dass Hagras Daten falsch sind - wie sollte ich
auch? ... Ich erlaube mir nur offenkundig falsche Behauptungen im CCC-Forum
klarzustellen" (in english: I don't claim that Hagra's data are wrong - how
should I? ... I only allow me to clarify apparent wrong claims/interpretations
about my own data).


>
>Please discuss Hagra's results and also mine now and stop distributing fairy
>tales in CSS. In CSS there is no open debate possible. Come here into CCC and
>defend your work against reasonable criticism.



Please leave it to me in which computer chess newsgroup(s) I should discuss.
Yesterday you still complained here
(http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?369998): "WHY did nobody in CSS,
where Hagra has published his results, discuss Hagra's data?".
And now - when I'm answering to Hagra in CSS forum - it's not good again!?



We're not living in the Middle
>Ages with its exorcism. So, stop defaming your critics.
>
>Read my data for instance here:
>
>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?370049


I've got one question to your data: Which Fritz 8 engine did you use there?
Background of my question: I've tested 5 five different Fritz 8 engines in
WM-Test (Fritz 8.0.0.5, 8.0.0.8, 8.0.0.19, 8.0.0.23 and 8.0.0.26 - called Fritz
8, 8a, 8b, 8c, 8 WM-Edition in my Excel sheet).
Looking at this Excel sheet with my detailed WM-Test results of 230 engines on
AMD 1400 (http://www.computerschach.de/test/index.htm or an Fritz extract at
http://de.geocities.com/krennwurzn/amd2.htm) you'll see that for example Fritz
8.0.0.5 (called Fritz 8) in the test position 1 found the solution Re3 after
0:15 (depth 9/25), switched to Rad8 after 4:06 (depth 12/37) and came back to
Re3 after 8:57 at depth 13/36) - all this is documented in my complete Excel
sheet as comment to the specific Excel cell (recognizable by a red mark in this
EXCEL cell).

So which of the 5 Fritz 8 engines did you test in
http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?370049 ?
You could check this by looking at the properties of your file "Fritz 8.eng" (in
your ChessBase\Engines folder): version (in deutsch: Dateiversion) 8.0.0.xx

The engine Fritz 8.0.0.23 (Fritz 8.eng from 2003 March 03rd, called "Fritz 8c"
in my Excel sheet) was the one Hagra refered to in his posts and at his site
http://de.geocities.com/krennwurzn/amd.htm.
And exactly with this Fritz version 8.0.0.23 yesterday I repeated my tests in
test position 1 and gave the results (all analyse lines) on AMD 1400 and P4-3.0
here in CCC and in CSS - to clarify possible misinterpretations of my Excel
sheet (Fritz 8.0.0.23 results in WM-Test position 1).

Further discussions about this topic I will continue (if needed) in CSS forum,
sorry ... where is no open debate possible :-)

Reagrds, Manfred



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.