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
rec.games.chess.misc
+ new post
About this group
Subscribe to this group
This is a Usenet group - learn more
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
 
David Kane  
View profile  
 More options Apr 25 2007, 6:34 am
Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.misc, rec.games.chess.computer
From: "David Kane" <davidek...@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 03:34:40 -0700
Local: Wed, Apr 25 2007 6:34 am
Subject: Re: Greatest chess players ever? Capa, Kramnik, Karpov, Kasparov, *in that order* (cuz 'puters don't lie!)
Print | View thread | Show original | Report this message | Find messages by this author

"David Richerby" <dav...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote in message

news:t6f*Ev8Ir@news.chiark.greenend.org.uk...

> 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.

> They haven't determined the strongest champion of all time: they've
> determined which World Champion plays most like a crippled version of
> Crafty.  That's better than working out which World Champion plays
> most like me but not much better.  See Soren Riis's rebuttal

>  http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=3465

I don't think Riis or you understood the original article. The
researchers addressed in detail the objection that Crafty is not
the ultimate in determining the best move - obviously
we can find some specific positions where the version of
Crafty used in the analysis is wrong, but that is not a
fundamental objection.

There is much very interesting and original work
in the article - perhaps the Chessbase synopsis concentrates
excessively on the findings rather than on the methodology,
since it makes a better story. Certainly there were analyses
that they didn't do which should get done. That's just the normal
way that research advances. In any case, the approaches
investigated in the article are far preferable to the "historical
ELO" or "chessmetics" nonsense, which are *completely*
lacking in rigor of any kind.


 
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.
Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2012 Google