Author: Andrew Dados
Date: 13:58:24 09/23/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 23, 1999 at 16:25:34, Thorsten Czub wrote: >And ? >Cstal is not designed to play blitz ! >It is designed to play 40/120 and has shown good results. >Not only me has found out, people have seen this in >paris, some guys have found out 1995 in paderborn (genius e.g.) Don't you people realize that 40/120 in 1995 is roughly equivalent of 40/20 in 1999 due to hardware speedup over those years... so I guess by 2010 CSTal will be well suited to bullet...:) (this remark being valid not only for CSTal, but for all claims about programs 'designed for standard'). >and also some guys have tried to say my results are ot true, >it would lose 6-0 or more against the top programs. than you >loggin in in ICC and hiarcs lost against cstal live ! >and it was not me playing. so i was unable to "cheat". > >Now somebody else plays 2-2 against junior and all >you can answer is to show a weak game of cstal ? > >You cannot stand that you are wrong, isn't this the main point ? >you cannot stand that your agressively posted opinion has become >a fake. a misunderstanding. a false claim. > >and now your best point is to show a weak game of cstal ? >I could quote many games where weak players have beaten strong programs. >so what ? >Give up. you lose ground. all your behaviour shows is that >you have lost. > >present the people with more of your "faked cb-autoplayer" >data. and try to convince them. but for those who don't use this >device, your "reality" will not be real. because it is not the truth.
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.