Author: Ratko V Tomic
Date: 15:33:26 09/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
> You never complained about the list when almost every top-program > came from the Mephisto-family or the Millenium company, could this > be a coincidence?! I came to this discussion list just few weeks ago although I have been playing chess computers since Chess Challenger 7, and have been following SSDF tests way back since Goran Grottling's lists in the ICCA Journal (which I was receiving since the first issue; I dropped it few years ago due to lack of time). You may have mistaken me for someone else. With hardware only models, there isn't much to pick as far as disparate hardware, so no issue there. As to software tests, one could have known with virtual certainty that the top 4 programs will be the 4 CB programs, before even a single game was played, as soon as someone decided that's who will have K2-450. Now, that's a fair play? Why not give about 9-10 top programs equal average hardware (each to play some games on fast and some on slower machines)? If there were not enough fast machines, there is no reason why only CB has to get all the fastest ones. If someone had put a CB marketing VP to be in charge of arranging the testing scheme, could have (s)he come up with anything more favourable to their company's product line? How? After all, according to your web page, that's exactly what they proposed at one point, to give you the faster machines/more RAM, but only for Fritz. You called it unfair at the time, refused the offer, then somehow in this cycle, decided on this uneven and illogical scheme giving _in advance_ the 4 top spots on your list to CB (even Hiarcs 7 vs Hiarcs 7.32 shows the same bias i.e. only the CB package got the top spot; to say nothing of CM, Rebel, Tiger, Crafty etc). If an organizer of the car race decided to run 4 latest GM models on a high octane fuel and the rest of manufacturers on a low octane fuel, and then publish the ranking of the cars, would you consider it fair play? Before the race even started they have virtually picked the 4 GM models to get the medals. Would it make it somehow fair if on the chart they add the octane figure for each car? Would that somehow prevent GM from crowing in their ads that they won all 4 top places? Would it make it fair if the race organizer claims that those 4 GM cars would have won anyway since he knows they're the best? > You don´t sign your articles with your real name. Why? This is my real name. I have exchanged emails with several people here, so anyone who could say otherwise is welcome to step forward. The CCC board admin can also confirm. You may have mixed me up someone else.
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.