Martin Bryant opinion about Strelka issue

[Christopher Conkie]

Martin is wrong.

It depends if you know what we know.

For what its worth Martin is quite accurate.

Regards

Christopher

[MartinBryant]

Hi Steve,
personally I don't believe that the positions that produce different results are of any relevance. By simply changing an evaluation weight slightly you can make an engine play very differently in those positions affected by that weight, even to the extent of tactics (because of move ordering).
To my mind it is the positions that produce identical results that are the giveaway.

[PauloSoare]

Martin is wrong.

It depends if you know what we know.

For what its worth Martin is quite accurate.

Regards

Christopher

What you and some people know, Christopher?

Paulo Soares

[MartinBryant]

Well now I'm well confused!
I'm wrong, but I'm quite accurate, at the same time.
Sounds intriuging.

So what is it that you 'know' then?

Tell us all, please do...

[Christopher Conkie]

Well now I'm well confused!
I'm wrong, but I'm quite accurate, at the same time.
Sounds intriuging.

So what is it that you 'know' then?

Tell us all, please do...

We know how Rybka works.

All of it, right down to the last centipawn (yes i really mean centipawn).

Christopher

[MartinBryant]

Excuse my ignorance, do you work on the Rybka team?
You've seen the source then?

[fern]

Sorry if my post sounded like that, but in fact not even me is absolutely convinced, as I said that you added extra weight. but I did not say I consider this issue already judged.
I hope you are mistaken, because I would like to see a new, original engine, as everybody else here.

STILL waiting a new colossus with a new, gorgeous gui regards
Fernando

[Christopher Conkie]

Excuse my ignorance, do you work on the Rybka team?
You've seen the source then?

No neither...but I bet you any money Vas would say we know rather alot about Rybka.

Enough for this for sure.

Regards

Christopher

[mclane]

paradox
dialectic

[MartinBryant]

Maybe so.
However, with respect, people like Uri and Michael have tried to debate this issue by providing repeatable empirical evidence. All you have provided is mystery and intrigue. Their evidence is something that any person can get their teeth into and make an objective assessment of. It is a pity you cannot contribute something with objective value for all to assess.