Author: Shep
Date: 08:42:17 09/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 20, 1999 at 08:23:37, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>On September 20, 1999 at 08:01:34, Shep wrote:
>
>>Since I have had several emails from Chris about this tournament and he never
>>mentioned anything in that direction, I guess I have permission. :)
>
>
>:-)) we will see what the programmer says afterwards :-))
Essentially the same as you ("2.50 broken"), but he is clever enough to know
it's no use getting into a "no permission to publish" discussion with me. :)
As I said, if I am able to confirm 2.50 is indeed broken, I will put a footnote
in the respective tournament page (as I did with MChess 8 in SC 98 III where I
used a setting which was classified as "experimental" by Marty).
>I an also explain you why (if you are interested).
[snip]
Thanks.
>since this version (2.5) was only for programmers to download to implement
>their engines into CSTal, chris and i never thought this would be a problem
>because it is said on the web site that version 2.5 is only for programmers
>and not for testing purposes. we - of course - never thought that people
>cannot read but download without reading what is written.
You should remember that people with an own mind never do slavishly what they're
told. :)
And that freaks just do anything when they experiment. :))
>Next time we put in the license-agreement: the user/customer has the capability
>to read and understand written-text on the package and user-manual.
>:-))
Hmm, I wonder if I am legally obliged to follow a written license agreement if,
as you say, I cannot read... ;-))
"Me Tarzan, you shafted." :)))
>Test positions are not very much disturbed by wrong styling. The key moves
>is often found via extensions and these extensions are often not
>influenced by styling. the best way to find out about the difference is:
>to play with the version 2.03 from the same positions 2.5 did and watch out
>the difference.
>Test-positions are not the same thing games are. in a game there is often no
>key move to find and the styling gets more important.
I think the basic point is the question: will 2.03 and 2.50 differ
significantly? If that is the case, I will need no further proof which version
is weaker but simply accept Chris' (and your) statement it is broken.
I was under the impression that the actual engine did not change, therefore I
used 2.50 (because I didn't want two otherwise identical copies sitting on my
disk). If the 2.03 -> 2.50 difference is more than just slight speed differences
caused by the new engine concept, I am willing to accept that my decision was
wrong.
---
Shep "Anti-Tarzan" :-)
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.