Author: robert michelena
Date: 20:46:42 09/28/99
The fact that Shep, as well as Didzis (http://www.konts.lv/usr/Didzis/) have the Tiger to test proves my point. Tiger IS AVAILABLE for testing; being available to the public is irrelevent to my argument. If SDDF were truly serious about the rating list (and dispel the growing anxiety among the rank and file ) they would do the following. Run controlled matches between ALL programs where the same hardware is available to all. Failing that, change to a format similiar to Sheps. Invitational tournaments. As it is now, reasonable people may infer, as a result of the suspicious allocation of resources to Chessbase products (suspicious in that the SDDF was accused of a similiar malfeasance before ), that "..something rotting...in the state of Denmark[read SWEDEN]" (with apologies to Shakespere and the spirit of 'Hamlet'). In short, if Dann would explain to all of us (if he has, then I apologize) what interest he has in chessbase, or in the integrity of the SDDF list. I am struck by the passion with which he defends and evicerates all who even dare whisper heresey against the meatballs. Dann, could it be you are an employee?? Just wondering. By the way, I own Hiarcs 7.32 and I have to agree; there is something erratic about its performance. I too noticed its prediliction for queenside castling. And on one occasion, while fighting the forces of mass programmers in Yahoo chess, Hiarcs drew a game, in which it had, in the middle game, a 2 pawn lead. Very odd. If anybody has any comments, please let me know. Otherwise, I love it.
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.