Author: Harald Faber
Date: 08:00:13 01/24/00
Go up one level in this thread
Please delete this post, "asshole" is not the wording that should be used here. On January 24, 2000 at 10:12:18, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On January 23, 2000 at 20:00:19, Christophe Theron wrote: >>I don't agree. The SSDF does a great job and their testing methodology is OK. > > >> Christophe > >whatever you want, but i do stand to my point that the autoplayers have not >brought us advantages. it is IMO a clear disadvantage that computerchess >has been reduced to calling number as 12-16, 16-6 instead of concentrating >on the game of chess. > >it is like talking about people, but not about them, only about how old they >are. IMO the reason some programs make no progress has to do with CHESS >and not with "how to make the autoplayer much trickier". >Stefan Meyer Kahlen has given a nice interview in chessbits where he >differenciates very clear between >1.How to make a program play stronger chess. >2.How to make a program play better in the ssdf-list. > >i can only subscibe to his statements and to his differenciations. > >for me, this is not ONE. you have to differenciate. >there are methods to get a stronger (better ssdf-ranking) chess program >without making the chess-engine any elo-points stronger. > >in human chess we call this: cheating, or psychologie of chess, >e.g. when kasparov or other guys make big loud noise and drama >whenever something happens, so that the opponent cannot concentrate. >e.g. in box-fighting muhammed ali was well known for his dramatic-loud >noise, to disturb the opponents concentration. > >you can discuss how much this has something to do with strength or >beeing an asshole :-))
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.