Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 13:39:31 01/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2000 at 14:15:14, Rajen Gupta wrote: >I asked about rebel geting weaker, progressively-and every body said ''that's >unlikely, or not true'' or words to that effect but no-one has actually shown >games or tournaments where subsequent versions of rebel are doing progressively >better-also there is no evidence that strength against other computers, means >weakness against humans-first of all there are very few games played by >successive versions of rebels against humans as eveidence of this dubious theory >and secondly fritz 5/6 has the best results against both humans and against >computers!! > >I think this theory is like saying that a not so pretty girl gas a very good >personality!! > >rajen gupta The problem is you seem not to consider as "evidence" what people say to you. Why? If I say to you that last rebel get me more times that Rebel 6 or 7 and play better, that's not truth at least I give to you a full log of my games againts all of them? Not only numbers, results in tournaments, etc are evidence. What you see, what you feel is evidence too. You asked and we answered. Words are evidence. What a guy say can be an evidence. And on the contrary, a number cannot be eough evidence in ocasions. Look the use statistics has for every kind of arguments. Fernando fernando
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.