Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 08:08:43 05/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 31, 1999 at 02:05:07, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: >On May 30, 1999 at 16:18:32, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >> >>On May 30, 1999 at 14:26:51, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >> >>>On May 30, 1999 at 14:23:19, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >>> >>>>Hi Mel, >>>> here it goes a fragment of a post by Dr. Hyatt you are constantly referring in >>>>the thread about SSDF testing: >>>> >>>>---------------------------------------------- >>>>On May 27, 1999 at 15:51:59, Prakash Das wrote: >>>> >>>>>Well, I still don't understand the point of this "world championship" then. Sure >>>>>, you can call it "hey, if nothing it will be fun", a "test of systems", etc. >>>>>But what are exactly is this exercise trying to prove? If program A on hardware >>>>>B, beats program D on hardware E - does that say much about A compared to B? >>>>>This belies the principles of science - you have to have a uniform platform >>>>>for all participants to make any kind of judgement. >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't understand what you don't understand. This is an "open" competition. >>>>Anything is allowed. Any sort of hardware and software combination that can >>>>play chess. It has _always_ been that way. It will always be that way. The >>>>question being asked is "what is the strongest electronic chessplayer on the >>>>planet?" Not "what is the strongest program?" Or "Who is best on equal >>>>hardware?" or anything else... >>>> >>>>---------------------------------------------- >>>> >>>> As you can see, you were attributing to Dr. Hyatt words by Prakash Das. >>>>José. >>> >>> I forgot to add that this is taken from message number 53426. >>>José. >> >>The fact I used the wrong author does not change my position on this issue. In >>fact, I don't agree that the question is not "what is the strongest program'? >>After all, when people look at ratings, reviews, etc., what do you think they >>want to know? I believe people want to know WHAT IS THE STRONGEST PROGRAM. The >>ONLY way to make a proper judgement on that issue is to compare A against B on >>equal hardware. For your information, the author of the post to which I first >>responded - Hiarcs vs. Nimzo - said I was CORRECT in what I said about comparing >>programs with equal hardware. The problem is as was stated by him was that they >>haven't the resources to do it that way! Not that I was wrong!!! > >It´s not only about resources. When we started to play on P200MMX we had to play >against programs which had a know rating on P90, to get a rating for the >programs on P200MMX!!! > >So, you are wrong. >And now we are starting to play on K6-2 450 Mhz 128MB - Those programs >we have to play against programs on P200MMX etc. until they have a rating >on K6-2. >Then we can start playing K6-2 against K6-2 > >Venlig hilsen > >Hans Christian Lykke > So who is Timothy J. Frolick who posted a response to me that I was correct and then went on about SSDF testing? He appeared to be associated with the SSDF testing. Is he? Mel> > > > >> >>Furthermore, Shep's site is where you'll find tournaments where programs ARE RUN >>ON EQUAL HARDWARE. >> >>If you like to see testing done with program against program on unequal hardware >>- have a nice day! >> >>Mel
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.