Do CC players play like engines?

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
P.S. - Now that I think about it, we might have had this when I was a game mod, and I just didn't know what it was. Maybe not. I'll wait for someone to tell me. 😀

Version 1 of the Analyser had something very like this, since it used a specific engine, and a fixed set of control data.

Version 2 of the Analyzer did not, since it could use any engine. The next step, if you recall, was to build a control database for version 2 for all popular engines.

Sadly, we never got that far.

So wait, let me get this straight: You're accusing me of argument ad hominem, or are you just coming out and explicitely stating that your posts have no content? You once again didn't reply as to what was wrong with my post, which by the way had nothing to do with you at all.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
ad hominem=logical fallacy. and you are pretending that my posts are content free, such a carefree and supremely idiotic assumption, is quite absurd. Surely you can do better than !Tony my boy.

ad hominem=logical fallacy

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Version 1 of the Analyser had something very like this, since it used a specific engine, and a fixed set of control data.

Version 2 of the Analyzer did not, since it could use any engine. The next step, if you recall, was to build a control database for version 2 for all popular engines.

Sadly, we never got that far.

Ah that's why. I didn't get to use Analyzer 1 that much because of my laptop explosion, and when I got back Analyzer 2 was already in use. And to think my brilliant Ro # was already the Gt #! Damn it!

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Version 1 of the Analyser had something very like this, since it used a specific engine, and a fixed set of control data.

Version 2 of the Analyzer did not, since it could use any engine. The next step, if you recall, was to build a control database for version 2 for all popular engines.

Sadly, we never got that far.

Gee, since you're not using these toys anymore, could you send me a copy?

Analyser 1 would be fine if it used Fritz.

Originally posted by eldragonfly
Such myopic and shallow twaddle, i must say i am impressed. Actually it is enough if one has acquired some realworld critical thinking skills, obviously in your case that is far from true. You trying to debunk chess engine matchup rates with an unlikely and arbitrary stalemate is rather laughable.

What exact statements are you referring to? How are they myopic? How are they shallow? How are they twaddle? What exactly impresses you about what I wrote? What are the precise "realworld critical thinking skills" that I lack? How is it obvious that I lack them? Why do you think I'm trying to debunk engine matchup rates? What do you think my position is? Where did I ever mention anything about a stalemate? What are my unlikely and arbitrary statements? What about them particularly is unlikely or arbitrary? What is laughable and why? These are all my questions for now. Unfortunately, I cannot continue the discussion until you clarify yourself and lift my present confusion.

Originally posted by no1marauder
Gee, since you're not using these toys anymore, could you send me a copy?

Analyser 1 would be fine if it used Fritz.

Haha, we should actually give him 2. Analyzer 1 only used Deep Shredder.

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
Haha, we should actually give him 2. Analyzer 1 only used Deep Shredder.

Problem with Fritz is that it only works within Chessbase. Analyzer 2 can use any UCI engine.

I don't have a specific problem with those interested in getting a copy.

But like any tool it can be misused. Could it help cheats avoid detection? Could it produce a rash of spurious cheating accusations based on cherry-picked data?

Maybe other ex-game mods should have a say too. Should I make Analyzer 2 public?

Originally posted by Gatecrasher
Problem with Fritz is that it only works within Chessbase. Analyzer 2 can use any UCI engine.

I don't have a specific problem with those interested in getting a copy.

But like any tool it can be misused. Could it help cheats avoid detection? Could it produce a rash of spurious cheating accusations based on cherry-picked data?

Maybe other ex-game mods should have a say too. Should I make Analyzer 2 public?

Do you think it could possibly worsen the present situation? Why would cheats even worry about detection now?

Since there aren't any Game Mods now, why not let the whole community have the chance to be Game Mods?

I think it should certainly not be made public, but I have no problem with you giving it to no1.

Originally posted by !~TONY~!
So wait, let me get this straight: You're accusing me of argument ad hominem, or are you just coming out and explicitely stating that your posts...

First things first. pay attention korch my boy..

ad hominems:

1. I'm really at a loss for words with you.

2. You troll around every thread with your head so far up no1's posterior that all your posts sound a bit muffled.

3. Yours are just personal attacks that fan the flames, and do nothing to discuss the topic at hand.

4. Math is not speculation you ignoramus, and if there's anyone feeling sorry for anyone, it's me for you chief.

5. So by your doppelganging standards, you shouldn't comment on it either.

red herrings:

1. I have no problem with no1's posts because they actually have content, and contain pertinent points and counterpoints.

2. His posts further a discussion, and make some sense.

3. You didn't make one useful comment as to why my post is "specious drivel and worthless speculation".

distortions/outright misrepresentations:

...If anything, since no1's completely passed up my post, chances are it means he has nothing horrible to say about it, at least not yet.

"It should be obvious that some of my post was meant to be silly."

Oh really. it's still idiotic blather no matter how you cut it.

"On the other hand, the math is correct (I think), and it could be a useful way to determine whether a game is really worth looking at."

This idea that a chess engine is doing nothing in short and/or drawn games is patently silly. Add it all up and the result is nothing but shallow twaddle.

Originally posted by exigentsky
Engine matchup statistics are useful but don't exist in a vacuum.

Wrong. engine matchup rates are a necessary ingredient of the theoretical framework.

Originally posted by no1marauder
... why not let the whole community have the chance to be Game Mods?

Now there's an idea.

Give the entire RHP community the tools they need to create the supporting evidence to attach to their "fair play" tickets. Add guidelines as to how to use the tools and what is indicative of unfair play to the FAQ.

Of course some authority still has to review it all, and someone has to actually be willing to ban the cheaters. Could lead to chaos I suppose, but we have that now anyway.

Originally posted by exigentsky
What exact statements are you referring to?

all of them, your dull insights, unfortunate commentary, arbitrary complaints, see-through rebuttals, zig-zag logic and careless assertions are painful to look at. You live in the land of make believe.

Originally posted by
I think it should certainly not be made public, but I have no problem with you giving it to no1.

and this is only because it will show your incompetence as a ex-gamemod as far as determining cheats goes.