Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:36:20 12/30/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 30, 1998 at 17:53:07, Reynolds Takata wrote: > >>>with a question yourself? >> >> >>What he is saying is that you are searching for the 'holy grail' of computer >>chess, > >Hyatt stop trying to start something you know i was searching for something very >very simple, that being what Kasparov MIGHT think is the strongest program(in >other words peoples oppinions on what kasps opinion might be. If you want to talk like a rude jerk, I suppose I should follow in kind. I "thought" that I made it clear, as did Blass, that your question was a stupid question. If you can't figure that out, sorry. If you want to be rude, I'm perfectly game to "go toe to toe" if you want. I gave a simple, non-insulting explanation of why your question is unanswerable. I was not trying to start something. I am, however, quite willing to try to stop it... > Now every person >in here has at one time or another made the statement "i think program x is the >strongest available". When people make that statement you have a general idea >what they mean. These replies of blass are just taking up space. First, I don't see how *anyone* here could read Kasparov's mind and know which program he thinks is best. Why not ask it of him directly rather than asking for someone to read his mind? Second, the question is, as Blass indicated, non- trivial to answer, because the answer can be different depending on the cir- cumstances the game(s) is/are played under... > That's my >oppinion of course, that he is making a totally useless reply to my question. >The fact that it is the oppinion that i hold is not up to debate, and i don't >want to engage in any debate with you attempting to change that oppinion. I >would be most pleased if the whole thread would be deleted, if all i can get is >semantic fanatacism. Further since i was aksing for oppinion and didn't ask for >any specific time control he could have simply said "well i think kasp thinks >program x is strongest against comps at 40/2 according to what i read at x. He >could have picked any criteria were kasp thinks program x is srongest at >whatever, based upon some evidence he might have. No, instead he just keeps >posting something that is of no relevance to the question, i have no time for >such things. I didn't see any "semantic fanaticism" in his or my posts. You are welcome to your opinion. I had no intent to try to change it. Because I didn't see where you _had_ an opinion, since you were asking the question. > > and it probably doesn't exist in the form you desire. Programs are all >>different. They play differently at different time controls, in different >>openings, and in different types of games/positions. You can ask a dozen GM >>players on ICC which program gives _them_ the most trouble in blitz, and get >>a dozen different answers, some surprising. For bullet you will get probably >>a different answer. And for those that play longer games you will get still >>different answers. And if you look at the "tactical" IM/GM players you will >>get a different answer than you will from the "quiet/positional" GM players. >> >>So *any* program could be the right answer to your question. Or the wrong >>one...
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.