Author: Albert Silver
Date: 04:58:30 02/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 04, 2000 at 00:43:49, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On February 03, 2000 at 04:57:46, John Warfield wrote:
>
>>On February 02, 2000 at 16:38:23, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On February 02, 2000 at 16:12:58, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 01, 2000 at 22:31:17, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 01, 2000 at 17:27:20, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hi Chris,
>>>>>> since you have collected the results of Rebel against strong human players at
>>>>>>standard time controls, for the next update could you please compute:
>>>>>>-Rebel's performance against players rated up to 2450
>>>>>>-Rebel's performance against players rated higher than 2450
>>>>>> Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>José.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>BTW, since I haven't found any information on the DT Fredkin prize results,
>>>>>listing time controls, I asked the 'source'. The answer: "all games for
>>>>>the Fredkin prize were played at 40/2hr or slower (sometimes 40/2.5 as was
>>>>>common a few years back.).
>>>>
>>>> I played some games at that time control! I also played at 40 moves in 135
>>>>minutes. I loved adjournments, they helped me to improve as I was highly
>>>>motivated to analyze the adjourned positions, and they were quite common at
>>>>those time controls (I even had one game adjourned twice!).
>>>>
>>>>> _None_ of the games were played at any faster
>>>>>time control, as was stipulated by the original Fredkin Prize Rules."
>>>>>
>>>>>I assume that we can take that as factual, since the source was one of the
>>>>>deep thought team during the Fredkin prize "hunt".
>>>>
>>>> Could you please be more specific? Who is the source?
>>>
>>>
>>>I could, but since he doesn't post here, I want to respect his privacy. All
>>>I can say is that he was a member of the team during the "fredkin hunt". I
>>>had thought that the fredkin rules said 40/2hr time controls to exclude action
>>>chess events, but wasn't sure. He reminded me that this was indeed correct for
>>>_every_ game DT played that was counted for the Fredkin prize, which includes
>>>the 2650 TPR. The 2551 did not 'win' the fredkin as USCF did count faster
>>>games.
>>
>>
>> How convient of you to hide behind the cloak of protecting someonelses privacy
>>in order to avoid presenting the data.
>
>
>I have no idea what you are talking about... I won't reveal the name of the
>person. I will provide game details as I get some. I simply asked "what was
>the time controls for the fredkin prize award games?" I received the answer
>"The fredkin prize rules stated that games had to be 40/2hrs or longer.
Don't play coy, Bob. You know what was meant by the comment. It's already out in
the open and it can't be kept secret anymore. What about the secret memos in
lemon juice and the recorded meetings in the offices near the coffee machines?
What if I told you we know all about 'Harvey'? My suggestion is to confess and
come clean before it's too late.
Albert Silver
>
>And how typical of you to make such a stupid comment... If you don't like
>deep blue, or its 'record'. Feel free to hate it. But those that "count"
>know just what an accomplishment the thing was, silly opinions or not.
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.