Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 07:18:28 12/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 1999 at 22:42:02, Roger wrote: >You say that "when ONE programmer is banned for no reasons, than all other >programmers should not participate too." But, of couse, you are making that >decision for ALL other programmers. I wonder what would have happened if you'd >asked if you could use their engines in a tournament that you wanted to ban from >CCC? I guess they all said "Use my engine" because they wanted to support Chris. >I think not. ;) You Thorsten, usurped their choice in the matter, for your own >agenda. wrong. i do my tournament no matter if ccc exists or not. i did it with dedicated machines all my life, and ccc has nothing done to change this tradition. i guess the programmers are interested in a tournament and that their programs participate. so that they can see how or how strong their programs fight against others. not any programmer has the time to test his latest engine against other programs. only a few professionals with great budget and workers have that time. >You say you have nothing to prove to people that would piss on you. Again, you >are making assumptions about people's opinions... There is always a lot of new >blood coming online. People are open to positions that can be defended, and just >because a few people piss on you, that doesn't mean that EVERYONE is pissing on >you. in the more than 20 years it is / was always the enemy guys pissing on you. i am used to this. writing about saitek-products, they piss on you and call you thorsten saitek. writing about novag products, the saitek people piss on you. thats the game. you write good things about A and not (A) pisses on you. you write bad things about A and A is pissing on you meanwhile not (A) likes the article. thats the game. i have never took a hand before my mouth just because i expected one side to piss. let them do it. its their job. they get paid for pissing. when i tested horrible playing novag dedicated machines, Guenter Zens pissed on me. I had played a tournament with 100 games with dedicated machines. the games with the novag machines in those days were a horror. later, when testing novag superforte B + C i wrote good things about novag products and guenter was familiar with it. but austrians were against it. they had no novag machines despite ONE machine that was send by ossi. this machine was of course broken, because ossi was pro Mephisto in those times. so they really reviewed a broken machine, send by the novag enemy ossi, just to proof that my positive article was wrong. you see: there is always somebody pissing on you. thats computerchess-life. it was in the old days. it has not changed now. >Forget Nunn tests. The explosion in the number of Winboard engines will only >continue into the future. I think you and Chris could influence a fair number of >programmers if (1) Chris would just drop the dogmatic egoism and (2) the both of >you operationalize your approach. Life ought to be about more than just pissing >off those that piss on you. i don't think many follow chris. it was a tough work to tune the prg. the way it is not saccing for nothing. it took much hours to make it play strong. it is difficult to balance the evaluations if you trust more in evals than in search. i don't think many will follow chris. they all follow cb and bob and amir. how many people follow rosa luxemburg ? they all follow bill gates and other capitalists. capitalism has won the battle of this century. so they follow THEM. it needs an idiot to try out something that all others have resigned to continue. chris and i were these idiots. but IMO the result shows that it was worth to be idiots for a while. it was notm easy. and it took time. but in the end they did not anymore laugh. in fact, they were not sure if they would win. >Roger
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.