Author: Chessfun
Date: 11:17:22 11/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 15, 2005 at 07:59:16, Günther Simon wrote: >On November 15, 2005 at 07:38:34, Chessfun wrote: > >>On November 15, 2005 at 06:15:17, Günther Simon wrote: >> >>>On November 15, 2005 at 01:54:08, Chessfun wrote: >>> >>>>On November 14, 2005 at 23:44:34, Günther Simon wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 14, 2005 at 19:01:09, Chessfun wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 14, 2005 at 14:56:25, Günther Simon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 14, 2005 at 14:31:24, Chessfun wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>... >>>>>>>>>Hello Uri, >>>>>>>>>Your game has nothing to do with the topic that I can see. I just searched the >>>>>>>>>almost 512,000 games in the Chessbase database.cbh that came with one of the >>>>>>>>>programs. There is not one game with the position after 5....Qb6. You can >>>>>>>>>argue all you want about some people who have played that position but you >>>>>>>>>cannot convince me it's a good move. It may have surprise benefits if you have >>>>>>>>>done some home analysis or you are playing some correspondence game where you >>>>>>>>>have time to work out all problems or can find games already played from that >>>>>>>>>position to give you ideas. Obviously, Deep Sjeng had an advantage here with >>>>>>>>>"prior knowledge" of the position backed up by a couple more book moves. >>>>>>>>>Congrats to the book maker. >>>>>>>>>Jim >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?461610 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Sarah. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You missed the point. >>>>>>>http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?461624 >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I wonder how much redundant info will still arise in this thread? >>>>>> >>>>>>As long as you count yours as one post, fine with me. >>>>>> >>>>>>>My post contained already all necessary infos about the setup flaw >>>>>>>and about the too short search time for such a position... >>>>>>>(independent from Fruit) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Guenther >>>>>> >>>>>>I missed no point. I simply pointed Jim to the fact that engine books were not >>>>>>used. >>>>>> >>>>>>Sarah. >>>>> >>>>>And what is the meaning of telling him something he knew already? >>>> >>>>Are you psychic? how would you know what he knew? clearly not by reading his >>>>post as if you did you would clearly notice from the post I replied to and his >>>>reply to mine that he didn't know that engine books were not used. >>>> >>>>"Obviously, Deep Sjeng had an advantage here with "prior knowledge" of the >>>>position backed up by a couple more book moves. Congrats to the book maker." >>>> >>>>Do you need a further explaination or is it clear enough now? >>> >>>?? You behave really weird here and I will let moderate your last post. >>>Haven't you still got that Deep Sjeng was favoured in this game, >>>because it used by accident a _second_ book with more moves than Fruit? >>>That's what we all were talking about and I don't see what's your problem >>>to grasp this from Jims post, from mine and from others in this thread? >> >>Again if you simply go back to my original post, it wasn't a matter of what I >>got. Jim's impression was that engine books were used. I simply pointed him to > >Jim was just under the impression of the truth :) >Axel told he used a short book for both programs, but that was >simply proven wrong long before Jim posted first. >Me, Jim and most others in this thread knew that Deep Sjeng used >an extra engine book. >The pgn itself contained the proof. >Axel just made a mistake and you still refer to his mistake instead >of the latter messages proven him wrong. > >If this still does not clear things for you up, I cannot help you. You keep going round it the same circle. And once again assume I need something cleared up which I didn't and don't. Why assume Jim had read the whole thread and therefore knew? all I did seeing as it seemed he didn't know was point him to a thread. Pretty simple actually, it didn't need or require any comments from you about thread redundancy and you've carried that redundancy on ever since. Thanks Sarah.
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.