Author: blass uri
Date: 13:58:02 03/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 19, 1999 at 16:47:55, KarinsDad wrote: >On March 19, 1999 at 15:01:02, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On March 19, 1999 at 14:00:16, KarinsDad wrote: >> >>>On March 18, 1999 at 07:01:52, blass uri wrote: >>> > >>> >>>Uri, >>> >>>Why exactly is this unfair? >>> >>>This implies that having opponent specific knowledge is unfair (e.g. Anand >>>having knowledge about Kasparov). >>> >>>Please explain. >>> >>>KarinsDad :) >> >>It is unfair because the rules should be equal for all the programs. >> >>I also agree that if anand buy a copy of kasparov and learn specific knowledge >>about the copy of kasparov by games then it is unfair. >> >>Fortunately anand cannot buy a copy of kasparov. >> >>Uri > >A few more details please. Is this unfair since one or a few programs have the >functionality or is it unfair that some of the programs are using the >functionality but some of the others (although they have the functionality) do >not have it turned on. It is unfair because because of both of the things. Junior and some other programs(for example Genius3) have a contempt parameter and they can change it to be bigger against weaker opponentsand smaller against stronger opponents. They can use knowing the elo of the opponent but not more than it. I believe that nimzo can use more than it(otherwise I do not see the point of anti-Fritz,anti-Rebel,anti-Junior options) If other programmers knew that it is legal to do it in the ssdf games then maybe part of them would do something similiar to nimzo's programmers. Uri
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.