Author: Reynolds Takata
Date: 11:27:01 12/22/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 22, 1998 at 00:25:09, Komputer Korner wrote: >On December 21, 1998 at 21:56:25, Reynolds Takata wrote: > >>Hopefully an end to this CM6000 debate. >> >>The two factions >> >>Faction #1 Argues specifically that "CM5500/6000 is a good TOOL(this is in no >>way saying the ONLY tool) for strong tournament players. >> >>Faction #2 argues that Strong players have no use whatsoever for CM. >> >>*********************************************************************** >> >>Faction #1: States that of course for training you need other functions besides >>the ones that CM offers. However, that has nothing to do with whether or not it >>can serve a ROLE in the strong players repertoire of training devices. This is >>because 1. Strong players have other programs to fill functions that CM lacks, >>such as opening book editor and database functions. 2.According to several >>masters(excluding myself) they don't even use some functions that Faction #2, >>claims are necessary, for a program to have ANY role whatsoever in the strong >>players training repertoire. >> >> >>Faction#2:Claims that because CM doesn't have certain analysis features it can >>have absolutely NO use whatsoever and to no degree in the repertoire of the >>strong player. >> >> >>What is meant by faction #2 is this, "In order for a program to have any role >>WHATSOEVER, in the repertoire of the strong player, it must have certain >>analysis features. If it doesn't then it can play NO POSSIBLE ROLE in the >>repertoire of the strong player" >> >>What is meant by faction #1, is this "To claim that CM can serve no function in >>the repertoire of the strong player is a logical fallacy. This because firstly >>the analysis data that supposedly CM does not provide can actually be gotten, >>though some small effort may be required. This statement is backed up by the >>primary spokesperson of faction #2 in the following post, which was in response >>to a demonstration of how one could actually get this analysis that is >>supposedly missing in CM. >> >> "Yes, but why should I have to click on switch sides every 2 >>ply just >> to get analysis? You don't have to do that with other top of >>the line >> software like Fritz 5/Junior 5, Rebel 10, Genius 5, Hiarcs 6, >>Shredder >> 2, Nimzo 98 CSTAL, M-Chess Pro 7.1, Kallisto 2 ....etc etc >>etc . >> >> -- >> -- >> Komputer Korner >> The inkompetent komputer >> >>Further, claimed is that WHEN you designate the ROLE of CM as but one of a >>multitude of computer opponents(a multitude of opponents is EXTREMELY useful in >>training), it fills a role in the repertoire of the strong player. If you want >>analysis on a game that you have played, place it on infinite, and then switch >>sides each time you wish to see the pv on various moves CM is considering. >>*********************************************************************************** >>Other Statements of Faction #2 >> >>" I agree completely with you except that if you don't use an opening >>book editor then you are not studying the openings enough. >> >>Komputer Korner >>The inkompetent komputer" >> >>This is a statement from a rated expert(KK( to Chris Dorr a USCF Life Master. >>Which implies that a expert knows better than a Master how the openings should >>be studied. >> >> >> >>Another statement >> >>"I definitely meant that few serious players use it exclusively. It >>has a strong engine but the lack of 2 or 3 critical features severely >>limits it's usefullness to the OTB tournament player. >> >>Komputer Korner" >> >>To be pointed out, Faction #1 does not claim that CM is the ONLY tool to be used >>in training, only that it can serve a role in the training repertoire of strong >>players. So it is irrelevant to the point in concern, if it is missing features >>that don't have anything to do with CM's designated role. >> >>Faction #1 is primarily composed of Masters and CM afficionados. >>Faction#2 is primarily composed of CM haters and lead by a single expert rated >>player(KK). >> >>KK can rightly so be considered to some degree an expert on some aspects of >>computer chess. This can be respected. However at the same time, there is no >>jury anywhere in the world that would make the claim that KK is more qaulified >>to say what is a useful TOOL in in the training of repertoire of strong players, >>than are a group of at least 5 master rated players. He may think that that the >>above statements are disrespectful, which in fact is certainly not the intent. >>Regardless however, for him to constantly state to strong players that they do >>not have the sense or intelligence to know what is a good tool for training in a >>field that they have mastered, and he has not, is an extraordinary insult and >>ridiculous. CM5500 and especially 6000 is a very useful tool for the strong >>tournament player. >> >>*************************************************************************** >>Faction #2 wants Faction #1 to accept that CM can have no possible use in the >>repertoire of the strong player. >> >>Faction #1 wants Faction #2 to accept that CM can and does play a succesful role >>in the repertoire of the strong players. >>***************************************************************************** >> >>R. Takata >>USCF Life Master >>Fide Master >>Owner of all programs in SSDF top 10. > > >Now that the 3 masters have lost their argument that they don't need to analyze >their played games move by move they are changing the argument to whether CM6000 >is useful at all to the tournament player. KK now moving to direct and blatant lying is beneath you, I defy you to show anywhere, in this group where I have said anything other than the point was that CM is a great tool, for training. You ought to go ahead and admit this lie now, before you force me to go and repost the statements demonstrating exactly that. Of course since CM6000 is a strong >engine that will find some moves in certain positions that other programs won't, >this makes CM6000 of some use to even the strongest of masters. I never doubted >this. All I said was that the program is a toy program. A toy isn't useful to strong players. You just made the toy statement because you were trying to say that CM is of no possible use to strong players. Because everyone has read your postings they and you know this is exactly what you meant, so stop damaging your reputation. The engine is not a toy >but the program/GUI features certainly are. The only reasons why a master would >use CM6000 is that is cheaper and it does have a strong engine. However there >are so many other top programs with so many worthwhile features, that are not >available in CM6000. CM6000 is only useful as an auxiliary practice engine to >the tournament player See here you are again contradicting yourself. How can you now say that it is useful as an auxillary practice engine when ten million times before you said the strong player has NO use for CM, and you never mentioned anything about use for the engine, just the blanket statement that the strong player has no use for CM. >top programs as your first main analyzing top chess program. Because of this >CM6000 has to qualify for toy status because of >1) it is cheap >2) it doesn't have enough good features for the tournament player and thus can't >stand on its own as the only program to have for the tournament player. Now since it has been stated umpteen billion times!!! That CM is a great TOOL for the strong player, which in no way whatsoever means the main or only tool. You are again demonstrating that you where never trying to say that it had any purpose and that indeed your only arguement was that CM had no role whatsoever in the arsenal of the strong player. I quote you "CM is not for the strong player." and yet above you are admitting that it does have a role, so it is seen by all that you are just being purely argumentative, because you are not a master. R. Takata USCF Life Master Fide Master
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.