Author: Peter Fendrich
Date: 05:22:29 04/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 1999 at 03:35:59, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >On April 29, 1999 at 17:41:12, Roger D Davis wrote: > >>If the results of the SSDF are claimed to be OBJECTIVE, then what is wrong with >>making all the games public? The fact that some of the games are not public is >>bound to draw suspicion. And it should. What does the SSDF gain by keeping >>certain games private? Nothing that I can think of. The SSDF is not a commercial >>entity, right? Then why keep some of the games private? > >You should take into account that they have been testing for a lot of years now; >in the beginning with chess computers only, which would not support automatic >storage of game notations. Furthermore, the PGN standard wasn't (well) known >those days. So, I simply guess that they only have a fraction of the games, >nicely stored on disk in PGN format. May be, some SSDF member can comment on >this ? That's true. Nothing is *gained* from *hiding* games. It's all about increased expectation on a low budget organisation. From the beginning there was no need for all the games to be stored. It was just a small club of members trusting each other and we had no reason not to. After some time the rating lists were published outside this group and the expectations increased. When all the games were requested it was to late to reconstruct it all. Nothing more, nothing less. Don't forget that in those days all the test objects were standalone chess-computers and everything was done manually - move by move, day after day... //Peter
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.