Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 21:01:30 01/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
I think we are all passionate about the chess programs we like. Me worse than most, and irrationally so. I seethe when one of my favorites is beaten. :-( !!! Michael Cummings (for instance) is [or seems to be to me anyway] passionate about Chessmaster, which I think is great. All of which is a lot better than a bunch of people who could care less. I try to talk about statistics once in a while. Quite frankly, I don't think anyone gives a hoot about the math. I have seen rational, intelligent people tell me that they "know" chess program 'A' is much stronger than chess program 'B' after a single game! Not a single tournament, a single G A M E !!! Will people ever decide to grade their chess programs on a rational basis? Using mathematics and logic and deduction? For playing strength, they probably should. But for fun? I'm not so sure. And if we could mathematically prove which one was best (fortunately we *can't*) it might take all the fun out of drooling over the latest release on zippy new hardware.
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.