Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Sorry -

Author: Chan Rasjid

Date: 19:18:38 12/12/05

Go up one level in this thread

On December 12, 2005 at 14:17:21, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On December 12, 2005 at 05:43:57, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>I left CCC for a few months(6) and came back finding Vasik finally released his
>>first beta after many many years of chess programming.
>>Great fun from the appereance of Rybka! Time to clone-guess and to test one's
>>Sherlock-Home skill in unravelling the mystery "Why is Rybka so strong"
>>I can never understand Daniel's post and the details even if I wanted to - meant
>>for the top 1% of chess programmers. My raw take is that it is a clone.
>>Definitely a clone - how else can a program reach 2800 as a first release. From
>>all his CCC posts through the years, the truely discernimg experts (not
>>necessarily you) among us know he could not come out with anything original or
>>creative and he often mistake fail soft with hard,etc...etc.. ask him a basic
>>question about recursive null-move and he would have himself exposed as a fraud
>>and then you don't need to search too much of a proof. Just search the archives
>>for all his silly postings! Do you then need any proof.
>>Still getting solid evidence is great fun.
>>Hope someone can prove how sharp my instinct is.
>>No special regards for anyone or ill-will.
>I am very sure it is not a clone.
>Lots of amazingly strong engines come out of the blue.
>For example:
>In the case of Fruit, everyone could look for themselves and see:
>Nothing but lots of old good ideas and new fresh ideas and no cut and paste from
>somebody else at all.
>Fabien's code is also an example not only of how to write a chess program but
>how to program period.
>Anyway, I think it is not a good thing to make statements that sound like
>accusations with no evidence whatsoever.

My apology. Just a very bad post. I wanted to delete (not available) it just
after posting. This habit of reacting and posting rashly, with whatever ... the
clone word..., is just not good. And of course we all know Vasik very well.

Fortunately, Andrew's post came immediately after to explain Vasik and possibly
ameliorated my indiscretion and I left it as it was.


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.