Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: CSTal2.03-Nimzo98, games 8-10/10, finished

Author: Thorsten Czub

Date: 05:53:40 09/25/99

Go up one level in this thread


On September 25, 1999 at 05:36:15, Harald Faber wrote:

>How comes that I expected this argument?
>1) a program should play well on each hardware, especially well when playing
>another opponent on same or even slower hardware

you don't understand how programs are developed and tuned and tested.


>2) I bet that if I had 2 K6-3-400 and would play this match again, the result
>would not differ much and again you would want a faster hardware.

i am sure whenever YOU would test something you don't like, it would
fail in your testings, yes.


>Isn't it strange that you always find excuses when Tal loses, Don Quixote?

i don't find excuses when it loses. i do find strangeness in your testing-
environment. Your way of handle losses of other programs against tal
is comments that i am cheating, and when others have results pro tal
you don't comment at all. so i don't see why your kind of REaction
is with higher moral than mine , Homo Faber.



>And Patzers ALWAYS have excuses when they lose.

now you speak about yourself ?

>The only way to stop critics like me is to show me/us much better results or let
>me/us reproduce better results.

Others HAVE shown you better results. you don't react in words. you lose the
power of speech in the moment the world produces data you don't like.


>But there is a deep lack in better results as
>the only one doing it is you...

and all the others here having posted good results and data ?
you don't even see them and their posts :-) funny Faber,
you seem to have a problem with your eyes.
the famous faber-filter.


>>it was not designed to play what YOU call "sound" sacs.

>Then it plays like mad because what I call sound is an attacking sac which leds
>to a win or if it was not really correct, leads to a draw. I do not need
>incorrect sacs.

And i don't need you.
you are as senseless as an incorrect sac is.
people like you always complaining - testing in strange ways - cstal does not
need you. better delete it from your harddisc. we will have to change
the licence agreement of cstal3: people like harald should better not
buy cstal. they are forbidden to buy it. we will make a command that erases
the harddisc in the moment it recognized that it is harald. :-)


> Every patzer can play incorrect sacs.

right. every human beeing.


>As Bob already said, it is nice to have an exciting playing style, but it is
>better to have a win ratio >50% and no user wants to have a program getting
>25-40% only.

aha.


>So Tal is designed to play incorrect sacs to lead humans astray?
>Sorry, I can only laugh about that. :-)))))

laugh. i have nothing against you laughing.

>For YOU, yes, because I cannot show discrediting results anymore and you can
>continue your false propaganda.

i am not doing any propaganda. propaganda is what YOU do: posting things
without having the hardware nor the software nor the knowledge nor the
data to say something. it is YOU posting prejudice, not me.
I do have the hardware, the software and the data and have tested the programs
long time before i post.



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.