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. >> >>> >>>Uri >> >>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. > >Uri 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. AO.
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.