Author: Charles Unruh
Date: 00:43:29 08/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 09, 1999 at 18:30:57, Mark Young wrote: >On August 09, 1999 at 17:04:23, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 09, 1999 at 14:22:49, walter irvin wrote: >> >>>On August 09, 1999 at 09:46:17, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: >>> >>>>Are you the Walter Irvin with a USCF rating of 1616? Or the Walter Irvin with a >>>>USCF rating of 1250? If so, it is totally inconceivable that you are even >>>>*remotely near* the strength of any of the top programs. I know...I am a USCF >>>>Master (rated 500+ points higher than you), and I am not even near them. >>>> >>>>You were on here several months ago talking about how you had the best program >>>>in the world, etc. But you refused to allow me to play it. You made an >>>>outrageous claim then, and you are making an outrageous claim now. >>>> >>>>If you expect *anyone* here to give any credence at all to anything you say (and >>>>not just about this...literally any comment you make will be considered trivial >>>>unless you validate yourself on this one) you must prove your statement. >>>> >>>>Bob Hyatt offered to let you play Crafty on ICC. If you can beat Crafty (without >>>>the aid of a computer on your end), then your statement may have some merit. But >>>>unless you do this, you will be considered some random crank, who just logs on >>>>every once in a while, and who obviously knows so little about computer and >>>>chess that his statements should be ignored completely. >>>> >>>> >>>>WHy do you post such statements if you are unwilling to back them up? They fly >>>>in the face of *all* evidence and experience. You must realize that they appear >>>>very peculiar to say the least. >>>> >>>>Chris Dorr >>>>USCF Master >>>well the thing is i have played many more games vs computers than you , does >>>not mean i better than you , maybe better against computers . its a possibility >>>.plus my true rating is not 1616 ,1250 ect they are ratings based on see below >>>posting .i think im some where around 2100 or so .but that will change as i have >>>been practicing 6 or 7 hr. day every day .my new financial situation allows me >>>to devote much more time than ever before .plus i will be able to compete a >>>whole lot more .plus i have something you need to be champion i believe in >>>myself 100%. >>>> >> >>If your real rating is 1600, then you really don't stand a snowball's chance >>in you-know-where of beating a computer program on decent hardware, without >>taking back moves or seeing analysis. It just won't happen... > >I am glad you brought up the point about seeing the computers analysis. I know >many players at the club who claimed they could beat or draw one of the top >programs. In all the cases I have seen they could only do this if they could see >the programs thinking lines. After I "showed them how to turn off the analysis." >It was crush city for the programs, but of course they claim they never looked >at the analysis when they were playing.:) In my state the best player is IM Mike >Brooks, and we has just a hand full of masters and most of them a below 2300. >There is no doubt in my mind that the best programs could beat or crush any play >in my state at any over the board time control. I don't know about M Brooks that dude would have long been a Grandmaster if he lived in Europe. He's got to be in the top three I.M's in the country but his chess is starting to slip a bit as age(booze :)), and years of playing us patzers in dinky swiss tournaments all the time where he has no competition. > >> >> >> >>>> >>>>On August 08, 1999 at 21:21:14, walter irvin wrote: >>>> >>>>>i just dont think it can be done .no one can build a chess program that i can >>>>>not beat, not even me .hiarcs was doing good the first 3 or 4 games , now easy >>>>>money .this coming from a under 2000 elo player .if i find it easy gm should >>>>>find it childs play ?????????
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.