Author: Ryan B.
Date: 18:49:11 02/13/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2006 at 17:51:12, Albert Silver wrote: > >>>>>You will find many technical posts of mine on this forum and in the archives. If >>>>>you want more technical discussions here, start contributing. >>>>> >>>>>Vas >>>> >>>>Most of your "many technical posts" were before Rybka's huge 800+ ELO jump (in >>>>roughly 1.5 years), i.e. post-CCT6 (Feb. 2004) where Rybka ranked 49th place. >>>> >>>>http://www.vrichey.de/cct6/index_table.htm >>>> >>>>But I'm surprised you jumped on this thread as the head-turning approach seems >>>>to be your modus operandi concerning recent "technical" threads concerning Rybka >>>>and its very unique behavior. >>> >>>Don't take this wrong, but I can't recall when I saw technical threads >>>discussing the unique behaviour of Hiarcs. At best, I've seen comments as to its >>>very selective search, or intelligent hueristics. In other words, nothing more >>>than what the web site says. >>> >>> Albert >> >>If someone posted an analysis clip where Hiarcs was reducing its total node >>count at a certain ply, I would respond to their question. >> >>If someone asked specifics about our king safety our pruning, I would be unable >>to directly respond to their question. >> >>It's odd that I'm getting more replies from Rybka Fan Club members than Vasik >>himself. Please don't feel the need for "attack mode" or "defense", I only >>asked a simple question for the _author_ to answer. >> >>Regards, >> >>-elc. > >It really wasn't meant as attack or defense, and I didn't realize you were >specifically referring to the node count issue. I read it as another >semi-complaint in the vein of Ryan on how Vasik does things. I found it odd that >Vasik would be expected to share the secrets of his success, when other >commercial programmers do not. At least I never saw SMK, Uniacke, or Morsh do so >here or elsewhere, hence my comment. > >My general philosophy on such matters (and not specifically about CC of course), >is that if one wants or expects someone to do something, then one must be >willing to do the same, and first. In other words, you can't claim that if >someone did that, you'd follow suit. You have to do the first step. > >Clearly you were talking about something else though, so it is of no >consequence. This is just to clarify my previous post. > > Albert You clearly have little to no understanding of my posts here. I do not complain about what Vas does or does not chose to share here and I only have stated the obvious regarding this and have even clarified that Vas has not does wrong in this area. Maybe you, Vas, and most other people here feel I contributed nothing to the computer chess community here with my ideas regarding center pawn structure, passed pawns, or what I shared with gambit fruit. Fine, I will just stop posting here if I have not been a positive contributer. My computer chess hobby will continue though. Ryan
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.