Account Options

  1. Sign in
The old Google Groups will be going away soon, but your browser is incompatible with the new version.
Google Groups Home
« Groups Home
Message from discussion Greatest chess players ever? Capa, Kramnik, Karpov, Kasparov, *in that order* (cuz 'puters don't lie!)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
help bot  
View profile  
 More options Apr 26 2007, 1:46 am
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc, rec.games.chess.computer
From: help bot <nomorech...@hotmail.com>
Date: 25 Apr 2007 22:46:52 -0700
Local: Thurs, Apr 26 2007 1:46 am
Subject: Re: Greatest chess players ever? Capa, Kramnik, Karpov, Kasparov, *in that order* (cuz 'puters don't lie!)
On Apr 25, 4:46 am, David Richerby <dav...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
wrote:

> raylopez99  <raylope...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3455

> > This was the article I was thinking of, per my earlier post, not the
> > Jeff Sonas article.

> That article is, frankly, junk: I'm surprised it was ever accepted for
> an academic conference.

  I am in the process of reading this article now, and just
noticed a laughably absurd claim by the authors: that
the truncated Crafty used would naturally rank all
superior programs in reverse order.  LOL!   This is the
most ignorant comment I have seen since before I began
ignoring many recent postings by the Evans ratpack.

  Of course, it is not the strength, but rather the
                 *similarity in style*
which would actually determine how truncated Crafty
ranks *all* other programs.  It is theoretically possible
for Crafty to rank Rybka near the top, penalizing it
(unfairly) only for the few moves which it correctly sees
but where Crafty would blunder horribly.  All this would
require is that Rybka *usually* agree with Crafty, but
when they disagree, for Rybka to always be right.  The
gap in ratings could easily be 400 points, if the key
differences of opinion were instant game-losers.

  I am beginning to get the impression that people who
play around with statistics in an attempt to demonstrate
something, are loony, as well as utterly incompetent in
applying statistics rationally.

  -- help bot


 
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.