diep's inferior evaluation

[ed]

Hi Ed,

Well, to be honest and I won't say either that Vincent is the most modest programmer off planeth earth But I still, I do not like Uris' posting.

Yes, I am planning to go to Amsterdam on friday and saterday hope we can shake hands then.

Deal.

Cheers,
André

Btw. Pro Deo 1.5 MP does not sound bad at all

Where can I download it?

Ed

[Uri Blass]

I think that the professional checker player will have no problem with it.
I think that even the professional chess player should have no problem with it.

Judit polgar said in an interview in hebrew newspaper that she believe that she is nothing special and she did not think that she has a special talent for chess.

Her opinion in the interview was that most of the humans could get a similiar level to her if they got the same educational conditions.

She said that being world champion is something special but not being at the level of 2700.

I do not agree with her and I think that even if I invest all my time in chess I cannot be better than IM level but I do not think that her words should be taken as an insult for professional players.

Uri

[Tony Thomas]

I think that vincent is arrogant when he claims that his program has the best evaluation and I do not like this behaviour and this is the reason for my post.

Well, of course, Vincent is sometimes a difficult type of human. I had my problems with him too, in direction your claiming as well.

But at all he is a friendly men and helped me a lot.

I don't like your public claiming that he is arrogant, because you're the same type in different ways.

I just remember your posting about the checkers stuff. You claimed if you would learn the rules of a 8x8 checker game, the world best players couldn't beat you with 100% score and you wrote that you have better things todo instead this stuff.

This is what i call very arrogant too and no point better then that what Vincent wrote. Also i remeber what you wrote about my evaluation. There are many more points i could be listed.

Best,
Daniel

This is not exactly what I said.

You probably mean to the following subject.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=10

I simply responded to a claim of another poster who claimed that I am going to lose every game against the best players and I said that I am not sure about it that is different than saying that I am sure that I can avoid losing.

My words were:

"Not sure about it.
If I will learn checkers maybe things can be different but I have other things to do."

Uri

Well Uri, you're writing always "maybe" and "Not sure about it" in serval variants. So, these kind of words losing her meaning in your case.

And also if i would start to evaluate your "maybe" and "not sure about it", it's still arrogant because you where thinking about it could be possible.

You should think a little bit deeper. What do you think will be the professional checker player (world best players) think about your statement ??

Best,
Daniel

Uri's claim that he can avoid losing against a strong checker player 100% of the time is valid. When a person doesnt know something it is Ok to say, I dont know, may be or I am not sure rather than saying yea my program got the best eval, but due to all the knowledge it is slow, and the search doesnt go deep enough yada yada yada. Take chess for example, you can see engines that are 600 points weaker scoring 2 or 3 points in a 30 game match. Also, the feeling of a professional checker player is irrelevant unless he can prove that he can beat Uri 100% of the time.
Most of you are attacking Uri, rather than attacking his arguements.

[BBauer]

What kind of impression do you think he will have after reading it?

Well he will have a good impression about

chess

and especially about

computer chess

Btw IMHO Uri is right again.

And a topic like "Blass's inferior posting" is wether nice nor right.

kind regards
Bernhard

[PauloSoare]

I think that vincent is arrogant when he claims that his program has the best evaluation and I do not like this behaviour and this is the reason for my post.

Well, of course, Vincent is sometimes a difficult type of human. I had my problems with him too, in direction your claiming as well.

But at all he is a friendly men and helped me a lot.

I don't like your public claiming that he is arrogant, because you're the same type in different ways.

I just remember your posting about the checkers stuff. You claimed if you would learn the rules of a 8x8 checker game, the world best players couldn't beat you with 100% score and you wrote that you have better things todo instead this stuff.

This is what i call very arrogant too and no point better then that what Vincent wrote. Also i remeber what you wrote about my evaluation. There are many more points i could be listed.

Best,
Daniel

This is not exactly what I said.

You probably mean to the following subject.
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... =&start=10

I simply responded to a claim of another poster who claimed that I am going to lose every game against the best players and I said that I am not sure about it that is different than saying that I am sure that I can avoid losing.

My words were:

"Not sure about it.
If I will learn checkers maybe things can be different but I have other things to do."

Uri

Well Uri, you're writing always "maybe" and "Not sure about it" in serval variants. So, these kind of words losing her meaning in your case.

And also if i would start to evaluate your "maybe" and "not sure about it", it's still arrogant because you where thinking about it could be possible.

You should think a little bit deeper. What do you think will be the professional checker player (world best players) think about your statement ??

Best,
Daniel

Daniel, I learned in the life that many times the things are not absolutely certain.
Uri understands well this idea and when to say: “I am not sure”; “In my opinion”;
“maybe”; “I think”.
Many times people do not understand this position, and maybe it´s your
case. Or maybe I am wrong?

Paulo Soares