Author: Laurence Chen
Date: 19:24:38 09/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 15, 1999 at 16:29:48, eric guttenberg wrote: >Jim, > >You shouldn't be so bashful about your opinions. Next time, say what you mean. > >I think you 're right though. I am perfectly willing to believe in an upset >when one comes along, but if the only posts regarding CSTal's outplaying >H7.32 come from Thorsten then I am inclined to be skeptical. The other >evidence clearly supports Hiarcs' superiority and to categorically dismiss >multiple such match results by stating without proof that it is all cheating >is not a convincing argument, to say the least. > >On top of that it does make one wonder about the reliability of the current >match. > >eric I believe that everyone is entitled to one's opinion. The problem is how valid are the results posted by the people at this site? It's very easy for anyone running computer vs computer to "fudge" the results, or to not include some games so that the score will favour one engine over another. So as the reader has a choice to believe or to discard the results posted. Unless there's a closed and controlled testing without the possibility of biasing the results, then any results posted by anyone can be considered to be false. I would think that all the people who makes contribution to this site tries to be honest with their results.... however, there's always that doubt....! :) Just because one is not able to reproduce the move played by the engine does not prove that the game did not happen. Your system may not be the same as the system used by the tester. A computer is a computer is not identical. You may have a pentium running with different hardware, video card, and another may have the same pentium with a totally different hardware. And performance between these two computers can be very different.
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.