Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 04:07:29 06/18/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2004 at 06:22:46, Sune Fischer wrote: >On June 18, 2004 at 03:29:05, Geert van der Wulp wrote: >>Yes, right, A KING sac ALWAYS decides the game. But are we testing the engines >>for helpmates or something? >> >>>occur rarely in games so it might not be hugely important for practical rating. >> >>It is true. In my own games I have never played a King sac myself, and I have >>never been astonished by one that my opponent played. >> >>>Of course the engine must also be able to get that kind of positions on the >>>board in the first place. >> >>Yes, true. I think most will not allow such King sac. > >How old are you? > >-S. Wrong question. Here someone wants to be funny by all means or his English sucks. Anyway he's not in the debate to talk about position tests. But you see the logic: you are against position tests and I show you that you can't have a good argument against it. Just by twisting around. Believe it or not, in the German CSS forum the WM-Test authors did never even once admit that notable chess programmers are rather pessimistic or negative towards position tests. Gurevich put all on his final trump, with acrobatic language he's simply saying that all those who use his test only think the best about it. For example the case of the actual Wch SMK. SMK has a question of one of the main testers this way (I gave the exact translation earlier this week): (here by heart) Q Do you use position tests like our WM test? A I try to be honest, therefore I know that I will now hit many people here against their heads... but I don't use it for principal reasons. Now this is clear, no?! But Mikhail Gurevich writes something like this. SMK had written this way BEFORE he knew the WM test. And NOW - after he knew it - he would be happy with it. This is unbelievable but it's true. Nowhere SMK has said so but it is being insinuated with the little twist of language, namely that he would if he knew.... How do you want to defend yourself against such "friends"? Making a special message and outing MG as a "liar"? No, impossible, because we all know that he's not "lying". He's simply so deep in love with his test. Know what I mean? It is a bit the same with Kasparov. He also still claims that HE did never receive the print-outs of DEEP BLUE 2 while we others read 'em in detail on the Internet... Or this way: did you ever hear of the so called "Potemkin villages"? It's a technical term to explain the conditions in a land like Russia or perhaps whole Asia. It's so big and pretty large. So large, that you can create facts just by words and nobody can contradict you. You get the moral? We Germans want to be "multi-culti", we want to be as open-mindet as the Americans at least. So CSS is almost condemned to show patience with Mikhail G. Also with regard to their own journal...
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.