Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Most brilliant novelty from cct7 Witchess-Arasan

Author: Arturo Ochoa

Date: 15:52:55 02/16/05

Go up one level in this thread

On February 16, 2005 at 15:20:31, Uri Blass wrote:

>On February 16, 2005 at 13:58:21, Arturo Ochoa wrote:
>>On February 14, 2005 at 19:56:56, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>On February 14, 2005 at 19:23:07, Thomas Mayer wrote:
>>>>Hi Arturo,
>>>>> I did not tune the book against Movei.... I tune a book for a specific
>>>>> engine. Anthony accepted my help and I did my best in 2 short months. Of
>>>>> course, how could you understand that?
>>>>we had that discussion already in several forums. Uri has his point of view
>>>>(which is IMO totally wrong) and will not change that... senseless to discuss...
>>>>You might remember CCT4 -> Since then I had never again such a fantastic tuned
>>>>book for Quarks needs - it was the work of Leo Dijksman which he had done in
>>>>several month with thousands of games and analysis. Of course it was Quark which
>>>>was playing that tourney but it had a fantastic book that lead it to positions
>>>>it can play. And that is what a good book cooker should do, he should help the
>>>>engine to end up in positions after the opening where it knows what it should
>>>>do. The more time he can spent on that the better it will do.
>>>>Vincencts 700 Elo might be a bit to high, but 300 is for sure a good number -
>>>>the difference between a random book and a well tuned book. Especially the
>>>>weaker or more unbalanced your engine is, the more it is important to have a
>>>>perfect book.
>>>It suggests that the engine is important because if the engine is not balanced
>>>you may solve the problem by doing it balance.
>>Every component of software is important including the book.
>>> Maybe for a weak engine even Vincents 700 is possible...
>>>I think that if the engine is too weak no book will help it unless you predict
>>>perfectly the opoenent moves.
>>>I do not see how you can do tscp 700 elo better by a book and tscp is not the
>>>weakest engine in the world.
>>>I guess that a book for weaker engines will be even less productive.
>>How do you know that? What are you proofs? You only guess  and how can you
>>support this?
>>>If someone want to prove me wrong he is invited to try to improve tscp rating of
>>>1699 in the WBEC site to 2400(slightly better than Amateur,Betsy,Leila)
>>>The rating should hold also against new opponents(that were still not released)
>>>because when I talk about book the idea is not to have killer book that work
>>>only against specific opponents with known books that is of course possible
>>>after lot of work when you put win after win in the book.
>>No, you are not so important so somebody wastes his valuable time in your absurd
>>contrdictions. :) It is enough to point your nonsense here.
>>What you dont tunderstand is the Vincent's sense. Because your lack of
>>credibility, he just put a extreme point. You think that a no-book engine can
>>wint a Title.Prove that in Tournaments.
>I did not say that my engine can do it so there is nothing that I need to prove.
>I never claimed that movei can win a title.
>I do not think that it can do it today and even if I will think sometimes in the
>future that it can do it I plan to say nothing about it before it wins.

On the contrary, you _dont_ have anything to prove because you cannot support
your suppositions on real facts. You _deny_ what you have been repeating for
years since you cannot hold your weak position.

I remember your famous 1. h3....... then I suggested you to play 1. f3!! e5 2.
g4!! :) and all your stuff about no-books. Well, it is time that you charge your
suppositions with some more realistic arguments.

Of course, since you want to continue holding your no-book theory and your other
stuff, you will provide easy points to your opponents. That is.


This page took 0.4 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.