Izak Pretorius wrote:
Thank you Norm.
I always knew you didn't like me,now i know it for sure.
It's not personal, i'm just not a fan of sloppy work and misinformation
I believe I understand what happened here Issak...
I created this topic with this post (split off from Martins TCEC announcement thread:
kranium wrote:lucasart wrote:
Laskos wrote:
And about this plethora of IvanHoe derivatives, I think only IvanHoe should be allowed to compete.
I completely agree.
+1
There are compiles of IvanHoe at the same level as it's derivatives
you didn't like my, Kai, and Lucas's opinion on the matter because PanChess is being considered at the moment for TCEC
although you rarely post here, you logged and began an arrogant campaign against other engines
one by one you discredited them with oft dubious info
Izak Pretorius wrote:
IvanHoe 50kQ x64 is not just a compile,but a modification by a user who claims this is just a compile.
Secondly IvanHoe 50kQ has some stability issues.
So Mars is a modified re-compile of Firenzina which is GPL Sad
Which brings as back to the Q compiles,it is not pure.
Best Regards
Peterpan
what on earth do you mean by 'is not pure'? is PanChess somehow pure?
i've got no idea what you're talking about
Izak Pretorius wrote:
There seems to be some misunderstandings here regarding IvanHoe and which is the strongest etc... as an expert on the field let me explain to those who may be ignorant or just simply don't know better.
didn't you just started compiling a few years ago?
and by 'ignorant', are you referring to just me, Kai, and Lucas, or everyone here?
Izak Pretorius wrote:
15 Ivanhoe 50kQ x64s 3037 4 4 19000 52% 3021 57% (cp)
16 PanChess 00.537 x64 3037 5 5 11000 47% 3059 57%
17 Bouquet 1.7 beta x64 3037 5 5 13000 47% 3057 54%
18 Ivanhoe 46eQi x64s 3035 4 4 31000 50% 3034 57%
19 PanChess 00.400 x64 3030 4 4 17000 48% 3046 57%
20 Firenzina 2.3.1 x64s 3030 4 4 19000 48% 3047 55%
It's (Ivanhoe 46eQi x64s) is 3 elo weaker than PanChess and the strong Bouquet engine.
with just 2 ELO separation, an expert would recognize the error margins involved and no make this statement IMO
Izak Pretorius wrote:
Besides,I though talking on this forum would be fun,but all i got here on Talkchess is blatant insults from you Norm.
my demeanor has been polite and respectful throughout
kranium wrote:
anyway, best of luck with your project!
Norm
(with the exclusion of the last couple posts)
Izak Pretorius wrote:
I think it totally sucks though to get free the greatest free code in chess history up to recently,and then turn around,use that code and put a copyright on it.What is up with that?! Incredible really.Laughable actually.
as you can see, you were the one throwing mud Isaak
Izak Pretorius wrote:
You can reply,i won't be coming here again,so keep talking to yourself if it makes you happy.
back to Neverland!
ok, no worries, perhaps you'll grow up one day PeterPan
sorry, couldn't resist
good luck,
Norm