Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 09:57:34 06/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 15, 2004 at 12:41:33, Steve Glanzfeld wrote: >On June 15, 2004 at 12:29:24, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On June 15, 2004 at 12:11:46, Steve Glanzfeld wrote: > >[...] > >>>So what? Testing an engine by playing (a) game(s) shows how it will perform in >>>that game(s), only. When you doubt testsuites to work as good samples, I can >>>also doubt any set of test games being good samples (compared to other games, >>>under other conditions, against other opponents...). >> >> >>Of course. Doubt what you want but you wont change the decisions of the top >>programmers who do NOT believe in position-test-suites. > >Who cares? I decide by arguments, not by famous names who say this or that. And >I say, a good and large test suite will always be a much better sample than some >test games, because in a game the opening book may decide, the time consumption >may influence the outcome, etc. and 97% of the positions won't tell if a 2200 or >a 2800 program is playing. > >But please don't listen, I'm not talking to you. I don't want to see another >reply from you, because my stomach is already aching so much from the laughing >:)) > >Steve I suspected that you wouldn't care if the top programmers were interested or not. You have a higher interest into the information if a 2200 or a 2800 program is actually playing in a game of computerchess. Yes. In such cases I always look into the scoresheet and there I can read who's playing. Honestly I did never see Steve Glanzfeld, but I admit I know the scores only for the last two centuries of the whole history of computerchess. But perhaps you are a Knight of the Ancient Past. Nice to meet you......
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.