Author: Graham Banks
Date: 00:04:23 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2006 at 02:54:20, Heinz van Kempen wrote: >On February 13, 2006 at 00:29:29, Graham Banks wrote: > >>On February 12, 2006 at 19:04:55, Heinz van Kempen wrote: >> >>>As we have totally different concepts and because of the history all this has >>>had I would suggest to avoid any comparison between our groups, at least from >>>CCRL people. We did not do this from our side and it would be fair that you also >>>avoid it. >>> >>>Thanks for listening. >>>Heinz >> >> >>Hello Heinz, >> >>history has nothing to do with it. >>CEGT do a fine job and we have never stated otherwise. >>Just because CCRL is based on slower time controls due to benchmarking to more >>modern hardware does not detract from the work that CEGT does. >>As we've said all along, all rating lists just add to the big picture. >>We do not see ourselves competing with CEGT and I hope that you don't see CEGT >>as competing with us. >> >>Regards, Graham. > >Hi Graham, > >this is not the point. I have nothing against other people commenting or >comparing. > >But...all of you know how CCRL was formed. You could have done it openly and I >would have said. "Fine, why not? Everyone has of course the right to try >something else or something new, we could have even supported each other or have >planned commom projects". The split was done in a way trying to destroy CEGT in >my view and the view of other CEGT testers. > >It is really better not to discuss this here. I always want to avoid quarrels >here and this is our own business. The reasons why I reject CCRL were explained >in an email to you Graham and ... Graham, you have admitted yourself what was >also unfair in your opinion. > >So my request is that especially Kirill, Sarah, Ray and you concentrate on >giving your own data without comparison to CEGT and we will do the same. In my >opinion there are a lot of points where CEGT is superior, but I do not mention >them constantly. The reasons why not comparing are personal and have nothing to >do with quality and after all what happened it would be fair from your side to >let us test without any comments just from your side. Let us stay in peace once >and for all this way. > >Best Regards >Heinz CCRL was formed by a group of testers who left CEGT. The formation of the group was not planned before the split and most certainly wasn't aimed at destroying CEGT. Many forum members know me well enough to know that I would never do something like that. However I know you feel otherwise and that this is why you "reject" us. Such an attitude is not good for computer chess and I would urge you to respect CCRL as CCRL respects CEGT. Computer chess enthusiasts are not interested in such squabbles. We should all work together towards the betterment of our hobby. Regards, Graham.
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.