Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is SMIRF compatible ... some Examples

Author: F. Huber

Date: 01:54:58 07/28/05

Go up one level in this thread


On July 28, 2005 at 04:38:17, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote:

>On July 28, 2005 at 03:56:07, F. Huber wrote:
>
>>On July 27, 2005 at 18:31:12, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote:
>>
>>>On July 27, 2005 at 18:05:52, F. Huber wrote:
>>>
>>>>On July 27, 2005 at 17:46:22, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On July 27, 2005 at 15:28:33, Joseph Tadeusz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>One point of view is that Steven Edwards made a mistake by choosing the
>>>>>>inflexible KQ notation for FEN, wich has now been corrected by SMK.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What you do with X-FEN is a workaround wich can lead to abberations like
>>>>>>
>>>>>> KgQbkgqc
>>>>>
>>>>>impossible in played games. Show me one game with three equal colored rooks.
>>>>
>>>>"impossible" is actually WRONG - "improbable" would be the correct word!
>>>>
>>>>>There are less than 1/1000000 of positions having an inner castling enabled rook
>>>>>alone, so such constructable positions are even more irrelevant.
>>>>
>>>>"irrelevant"? Well, 1/1000000 of all possible chess positions (about 10^38 IIRC)
>>>>are still quite a lot!
>>>
>>>>You see: NONE of your arguments really convince ANYONE!
>>>>
>>>>Franz.
>>>
>>>How would you know?
>>>
>>>compatibility to 960 relevant Chess960 starting positions is ignored by
>>>Shredder, whereas X-FEN is able to face some compromises in that addressed
>>>point, whether you call it relevant or irrelevant does not matter at all.
>>>
>>>Reinhard.
>
>>Your Majesty, (or should I better call you ´God´?)
>
>Franz,
>
>such nonsense would neither be helpful nor underline your point of view.
>
>>once again I´ve forgotten, that your opinion is the one and only truth in our
>>whole universe (and maybe also in all parallel universes, if they exist) -
>>I´m so sorry about having ignored this fact!
>
>a) there has been a world of Chess960 applications before FRC-Shredder,
>b) it is in fact Shredder now establishing an incompatible FEN,
>c) I myself have suggested some compromises, SMK none but refuted all.
>
>>Please forgive us dumb, small idiots ...
>
>You are searching egocentric people at the wrong place. First learn the
>meaning of the word compatibility, then try to join a serious discussion.
>
>Reinhard.

There´s no need for further discussions with you, Reinhard -

I´ve finally accepted your infallibility ... ;-)

Franz.




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.