Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 22:44:49 07/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 1999 at 01:04:19, Mark Young wrote: >On July 24, 1999 at 00:14:32, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >>The game as I stated in my original post was at 40/2. Hiarcs selected a4 and >>after making the move its score dropped to a minus. I therefore allowed Hiarcs >>to replay the move. > >It still makes no sense to me why you would do this. ________________ I did it for the simple fact that after a4 the score went from a plus to a minus and I was curious if Hiarcs would play what I thought a bad move again - it did not. _________________________________________________ > Hiarcs then selected Rf1. I again let Hiarcs replay the move >>and again it selected Rf1. > >My Hiarcs 7.32 still likes a4 with a nice + score. _____________________________ This is very strange indeed. I know what I saw and I know that Hiarcs would not repeat a4. _____________________________________> >> >>Now, I believe it is quite evident that Hiarcs learning function did not allow >>it to replay a4 and insisted on playing Rf1. If you think a4 was not a bad move, >>then how come Hiarcs would not play it again and insisted on Rf1 > >My programs still plays a4....Show us the line you are _________________________________ There is no line because the game continued with Rf1 - and I gave you the line from that point on. ________________________________________ talking about that >dropped hiarcs 7 score to a minus after the move a4. > > >> >>By the way, your headline in the post to me is not appreciated. I expected an >>intelligent discussion about this and not some silly rhetoric. > >No you do not...you reject what I said about the position out of hand. You have >given nothing back to this discussion. Here is your reply __________________ I gave you all the information needed. There is absolutely nothing I can add for as I told you from the beginning, Hiarcs would not replay a4 and insisted on Rf1 - and I gave you the line thereafter! There is nothing- NOTHING further I can add. If a4 is so good - why didn't Hiarcs play it again? Do you expect me to go back and put in a4 to make you happy and play the game again? Mark, I have lots of other things to do. I am playing in a tournament; I have painting to do; I have yard work to do; I have a family that likes to go places. Sorry, I am not going back to that game - life moves on. If you disagree, I can live with that. __________________________________________ >_______________________ >"For me to go back to that game and analyze >the position would be very time consuming. If you set up the position before a4 >and let Hiarcs select a move, see what it plays and notice the score by HIarcs >while waiting for a reply. Next, have Hiarcs replay the move and see WHAT move >Hiarcs selects. That should solve the issue. If a4 was not a bad move, why would >it keep playing Rf1 instead???" >________________________ > >Well I did what you ask...and Hiarcs still plays a4. I __________ Yes, Hiarcs played a4 in my game too. Have you let it think for awhile after the move and then have Hiarcs replay the move at 40/2? took the time and >analyzed the position...something you were not will to do. I even let other >programs take the stronger side "in your opinion" to see ______________________ You played Blitz not 40/2. ________________________ if they could bust the >move a4 of Hiarcs 7.32 which you claim is weak and a loser. I showed the game >results and my reasoning about the position. In turn you have given nothing >back, and in turn just stick to your claim that a4 is an example of hiarcs 7.32 >weak play and and by this shows proof that Hiarcs 7.32 is a weak program. _______________ I never said Hiarcs is a weak program. I said very clearly that Hiarcs is not a bad program just not a great program. You can go back and look at my original post to you under the title: To Mark Young. It states there exactly what I said to you. ________________________ ____________________________________> > >>examples and I gave you some. You insist on dwelling on this trying to dispute >>even the program you are raving about. Hiarcs recognized a4 was bad and that's >>why it wouldn't play it again - unless you have some better explanation? > >My Hiarcs 7.32 still plays a4. ___________________ I answered this above. > > >> >>Regards, >>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.