Author: Mike van Rooyen
Date: 14:51:32 12/26/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2005 at 14:50:57, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On December 26, 2005 at 14:21:24, George Tsavdaris wrote: > >>On December 26, 2005 at 14:06:40, Thorsten Czub wrote: >> >>>nonsense >> >> Actually that kind of conversations are useless and don't contibute to any >>positive thing..... >> You should give examples that contradict Mike's statement, while Mike should >>give examples that follow his statement.... None of you gave even a single fact, >>only personal opinions not even detailed ones..... > >How does one OBJECTIVELY verify what is "humanlike style" (and all similar >claims) and what is not? > >You can't. > >That's why it is propaganda. > >-- >GCP You can. A 'humanlike'style is one that imitates humans.The best of human chessplayers play with a noticible plan,e.g minority attack in QGD Exchange variation etc. Hiarcs 10 more than Fritz 9 lacks this sense of purpose.If a strong chessplayer looked at the style of both engines I believe they would see this.
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.