Author: Günther Simon
Date: 02:47:16 09/04/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 03, 2005 at 13:59:43, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On September 03, 2005 at 08:54:06, Günther Simon wrote: > >>On September 03, 2005 at 08:47:30, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >> >> >>>>>I have seen this game, but Zappa reconnected 3x (!!!). 1x is ok but 3x no. >>>>> >>>>>German: einmal abstürzen ist OK, aber nach dem 2. Mal dann hätte ich protestiert >>>>>und Zappa hätte verloren. Punkt! So geht das nicht. Abstürze stören nämlich >>>>>einen Partieverlauf gewaltig, so dass eine Partie mit 3 Abstürzen als verloren >>>>>zu werten ist. >>>> >>>>Bödsinn, wenn Programme gegeneinander spielen. >>> >>>Diese eine Partie dauerte fast ewig! Da stimmte etwas nich. Punkt! >> >>Ja eben ;) >> >>> >>>>Darüberhinaus sind PlayChess games völlig ohne Bedeutung zur Spielstärke- >>>>einschätzung, sondern werden nur zum Testen von Engine-Teams genutzt. >>> >>>Manche sehen das anders. Sie geben nie remis und geben nie auf. Und weil sie >>>einen superschnellen Rechner haben, ziehen sie schneller und gewinnen nach Zeit. >>>(Ich habe mein Fett abbekommen einige Male so) >> >>Ja eben ;) schreibe ich doch, vergiss die server games... >> >>Du widersprichst Dir ja selbst? Erst nimmst Du die Partien ernst und dann sagst >>Du da stimmt das nicht und das nicht blabla... Also was nun? >> >> >>Guenther > >Excuse me but this is not a good argument. You are following a factual "misuse" >of gameplaying on a server. Namely when programs (or do you mean their >operators) dont accept a draw but try to win on the base of their stronger >hardware. But this is NOT a forced part of online chess. It's more a misuse of >chess as such. I think we all (also programs) should follow the rules of chess. >I think that Eduard is also wrong if he complains by saying that he often had a >draw but then lost due to fast play by the computer opponent. But IF that is in >order with the rules of online chess THEN you can't blaim ONLINE CHESS on >SERVERS for such results. Also in human chess not the won or drawn position is >decisive but the concrete result at the end of the game. If you lose a drawn >game or if you draw a won game it is NOT the performance of your opponent but >your own weakness. > >The conclusion out of all that is this: > >server games in chess are as good as all other sorts of chess. If the particular >rules are respected then all is fine. One is not allowed to fall back into say >human chess views and pretend that a game is won or drawn but was ONLY lost or >drawn due to server tricks. If you ply on servers you should accept the rules. > >The consequence of Eduard right now to no longer posting Zappa games at all from >the servers is a bit irrational to say the least. It is always the same. You >criticise or comment on Eduard and he's ashamed and feels offended. For zero >reasons. Criticism and commentaries - this is the base of all internet talks. It >is not by definition insulting the persons behind the messages. It is rather >childish to act after the maxime: either you respect what I'm posting without a >slight critic or I'm going away or I'm stopping posting the games - and you >critic are responsible for my retreatment. Adults shouldn't do that this way. > >Finally. > >It was of great help to see all the lost games by Zappa. It makes no serious >sense if then criticism aroused that in the overall stats Zappa did WIN more >games than he lost. Also Eduard did NEVER say the opposite. What Eduard did was >the presentation of losses of Zappa. And that was a good thing! Also before the >background that people here appeared to say as if Zappa was almost unbeatable >and could even not be stopped by something like HYDRA. LOL. > >The honor of Eduard is that he set the record straight by posting many games >where Zappa played as weak as any other "super" machine or program. > >You Guenther seem to be happy that Eduard will stop now with his posting such >losses. This is scientifically a wrong issue. > >Eduard must continue to post his games where Zappa doesn't win. Period. You did not understand any word of my posting and your whole message is completely irrelevant regarding my post. PlayChess server games are just meaningless, because authors at least are only there for _testing_ not for results. Moreover the server is much too buggy. Did you realize BTW that Eduard himself questions the server games at PlayChess, which is of couse completely illogic in regard to his interest in the _result_ of the games. Guenther P.S. If you still don't understand -> it is of no matter what selection of games are posted from there, it would be the same for me, if only wins of Zappa or engineX were posted...
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.