Author: F. Huber
Date: 02:26:32 07/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 28, 2005 at 05:13:49, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote: >On July 28, 2005 at 04:54:58, F. Huber wrote: > >>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. > >Franz, >don't behave like a child. ... Sorry, I´ve only aligned to my interlocutor! ;-) 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.