Author: Tord Romstad
Date: 02:41:54 10/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2005 at 15:47:41, Alex Newman wrote: >IMO, if the engine does much better against Fruit then the other opponents, it's >either tested and tuned against Fruit only, or it's a Fruit clone. Why? I don't see any logical reason why this should be so. It is perfectly normal that a program does better against some opponents than against others, as all experienced testers can tell you. Besides, after so few games, we just cannot say that the new List does better against Fruit than against other opponents. Making conclusions after just 16 (!) games is completely ridiculous. >In the List case, I suspect both. No proof of course, just my oppinion, still >too early to say, etc, etc If you have no better justification for your opinion than this, you should keep it to yourself. Having played against List in an OTB tournament recently while talking to its author, I can almost guarantee that List and Fruit have very little in common. Saying that you suspect a program to be a clone is an extremely serious accusation, especially when the program in question is commercial. Unless you have extremely solid evidence, you should avoid making the accusations public. It is better to contact the author of the program you think it is a clone of. Tord
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.