A00 - Irregular Openings / Orangutan-Sokolsky

[Rolf]

Rolf,
I am was not asking you... we know you don't do anything for free.

What are you talking about? My whole feedback for your crappy database was for free. What do you expect more? You cant handle criticism of highest levels and this will be your commercial problem not mine.

[James Constance]

However doing a default double search in chessbase including similar names finds 1258 doubles. Having the same game with a small difference in the name (perhaps only 1 letter) undermines the quality claim a little./quote]

Although, the doubles are clearly based on the same game, I missed the point somewhat, in that the reason they are included is because the recorded moves are not exactly the same, in the same order, in the games.

[budfit]

Ahh Rolf,
when are you going to admit that all your feedbacks are based on just blah blah blah. The proficient readers don't buy these things anymore, trust me. They go for the facts which you don't have. And don't repeat yourself you provided enough facts, because this you said already several times, but when we asked you which facts, you turned the discussion away to some Rybka...

You haven't provided any single fact that the database has any quality issues, talk general and support other chess professionals who really try to analyze this database and don't just talk. We've been always able to answer with a calm language without using ''crappy'', ''false'', ''mess'' and other superlatives.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com

PS James submitted a very valid question. I will come back to this in a minute.

[budfit]

James,

thanks for your analysis and valid question. Basically for the almost doubles we answered this in our previous post.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=20

there we tried to explain the whole situation and why it is almost impossible to search 5.2 million games game by game. The percentage is very small to almost doubles and as we learnt sometimes it is not almost double, but really a different game just with one extra move, or in other cases there were two recorders of the games which recorded the game with +/- one game. I wonder if somebody did similar search in the most famous databases such as Mega from CB or Huge from CA.

To your question:

However doing a default double search in chessbase including similar names finds 1258 doubles. Having the same game with a small difference in the name (perhaps only 1 letter) undermines the quality claim a little.

The creators of databases use different methods of dedups, they cannot even agree between themselves (and now try to convince your customers). It's like egg-chicken discussion. So our technical answer :
If we exclude headers and we deduplicate only the body of the game (have you included the headers in your dedup process?) we eliminate huge problems in the deduplication process which includes headers. Our own experience is whenever you include headers in the deduplication process you will always find doubles. Always. Even with a simple query. This is never-ending process when you want to achieve real ZERO duplicates.

Second question of James:

Also the base seems to include correspondence games - so quantity-wise shouldn't it be compared to megabase + correspondence 2009?

Since this is far away to the original post of A00 - Irregular openings, we will use your question as a basis for another valid discussion. We are opening a new post (link will be added later to this post) with a subject : ''Difference in quality between correspondence games and practical games'' and try to answer your question there.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF (ELO 2474)
http://www.openingmaster.com

[Rolf]

Ahh Rolf,
when are you going to admit that all your feedbacks are based on just blah blah blah. The proficient readers don't buy these things anymore, trust me. They go for the facts which you don't have. And don't repeat yourself you provided enough facts, because this you said already several times, but when we asked you which facts, you turned the discussion away to some Rybka...

You haven't provided any single fact that the database has any quality issues, talk general and support other chess professionals who really try to analyze this database and don't just talk. We've been always able to answer with a calm language without using ''crappy'', ''false'', ''mess'' and other superlatives.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com

PS James submitted a very valid question. I will come back to this in a minute.

Dann told you the same and you didnt listen.Look, this isnt a personal thing and if I quote Dann and Jon etc this should impress you. But again the work should then be done by yourself because you want to make money with these products, nobody else. Do your homework and then your business will flourish. Until then bybye.

[budfit]

Rolf,
I never said it's personal, we don't know you and you don't know us, so it can't be personal. Again, once for all, you quoted John and Dans, but these posts have been fully answered with our full explanation of the process or posting a counter-question. So I am somehow missing your evidence, because the one you are still referring to had been answered couple of times. Regarding the business our motto is ''largest database with quality'' and anything which undermines this statement will be fully investigated by us.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com

[Rolf]

Rolf,
I never said it's personal, we don't know you and you don't know us, so it can't be personal. Again, once for all, you quoted John and Dans, but these posts have been fully answered with our full explanation of the process or posting a counter-question. So I am somehow missing your evidence, because the one you are still referring to had been answered couple of times. Regarding the business our motto is ''largest database with quality'' and anything which undermines this statement will be fully investigated by us.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com

Again, you are large because you still have too much doubles. So that isnt quality either. Admit it; TWIC and Megabase are better. So much better. Largely.

[James Constance]

Alexander

Although you may have good reasons for deduping excluding the headers, I would argue, based upon browsing the doubles found in the chessbase default dedupe, that just about all of these are real doubles.

If I were promoting a quality database, I would do something about these.

But that's just an opinion, and at least you have made clear the methods you used.

Best

James

[budfit]

thanks James, appreciated your time spent on this. May I ask you to provide which two games are real doubles. E.g. game # 212 equals to game #1450 or game #3566 equals to game number #43345. So we can have a closer look to this. I am sure there is a logical explanation.
Regarding the infamous headers, seems like this is real concern of quite few players and we do appreciate the views. Although the header does not undermine the quality of the database (and in our DB, there are always headers) we are going to spend some time analyzing this part as well.

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com

[budfit]

... and the link to the mentioned new post :

http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 024#218024

Best Regards,
Alexander Horvath, SIM ICCF
http://www.openingmaster.com