Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 07:59:24 01/10/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2006 at 10:18:26, Thorsten Czub wrote: >I guess the problem with fritz is as system immanent as the asymmetric search >and the static exchange evaluator is system immanent in genius. > >those things will never change and thats the reason those programs get beaten. What is system-immanent more than just a word for you? Explain what you really mean. What is system for Fritz? And dont forget that Frans is a Dutch. What he to do with your arch enemy ChessBase?? Then you say something again that is zero, nothing. A program loses because of its immanent weaknesses. Tough! A real discovery. Do you prefer that they lose because of the weather? But there is another weakness in your typical speech. You are outdated with your examples. Genius is over. Why did Rebel lose? Why does Pro Deo lose. Not because of immanent weaknesses? Tough! But what do you say about the new programs. Why do they lose? Why Zappa lost in Paderborn? Why Rybka lost that one game? I know why: because of the system! Someone asks you a clear question: do you want to say that others than Fritz know exactly what is going on when they are just losing at that moment? And where is your answer? Where? - Nowhere! Because you have no answer. Because there is no answer on such a question that was just posed because of your theory that poor Fritz didnt have an idea in positions when he lost. Well, this is really a deep discovery.
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.