Spirituality
10 Mar 12
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RingwraithPeople who cheat by using software to win some/all their chess games. The percentages refer to match-ups with patterns of computerized play which differ from human play - even high quality human play. Using "engines" is specifically forbidden by the TOS (Terms Of Service). The web site used to give cheats short shrift and ban them, but it seems to no longer be a priority, which is OK I think as long as they don't punish people for discussing it, and exposing cheats - which is something they used to do (and fair enough it was too, at that time), back when the perpetrators were investigated and expelled from the site without excessive delay.
Just out of curiosity...I haven't been on these forums much. What's this that I keep hearing about chess engines and percentages?
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by Proper KnobI meant your evaluation process of the data produced is flawed because the
The process is supposedly flawed yet you then state -
I do not have access to your evaluation process so how should I know.
You don't know how the data is evaluated yet it is flawed simply because someone else said so. 🙄🙄 Do you actually think before you type?
Later on today i'll be posting a full 20 game analysis of a ...[text shortened]... site, he asked me if i could run a check on him. His percentages fall well within the limits.
data shows 65% match in a total of 20 of my best games. That is like saying
someone cheated on a test by getting a "D" grade in school. This sounds to me
like "head up arse." I have no idea of how you get the data for your evaluation.
Perhaps that is flawed too.
Originally posted by RingwraithProper Knob and I have had strong disagreements on evolution vs. creation.
Just out of curiosity...I haven't been on these forums much. What's this that I keep hearing about chess engines and percentages?
So he has resorted to attacking me as cheating on my chess games by using
a chess engine, probably because he has been unable to win the argument
that evolution is fact.
P.S. In his opinion, anyone that doesn't believe that evolution is a fact is a
mental moron.
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsThe engine use data was about your chess games not about evolution.
Proper Knob and I have had strong disagreements on evolution vs. creation.
So he has resorted to attacking me as cheating on my chess games by using
a chess engine, probably because he has been unable to win the argument
that evolution is fact.
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsThe data showed a 65% matchup for the top choice engine move, your top 3 matches were around the 92%. When you consider that every chess world champion, and every correspondence world champion and even todays modern super GM's struggled to get above 85% something is amiss. Couple that with your claim that you are really only about 1500 OTB and your limited chess knowledge you have presented in the chess only forum. It doesn't stack up. It should be noted also that three independent people have come up with almost exactly the same results.
I meant your evaluation process of the data produced is flawed because the
data shows 65% match in a total of 20 of my best games. That is like saying
someone cheated on a test by getting a "D" grade in school. This sounds to me
like "head up arse." I have no idea of how you get the data for your evaluation.
Perhaps that is flawed too.
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHinds😴
Proper Knob and I have had strong disagreements on evolution vs. creation.
So he has resorted to attacking me as cheating on my chess games by using
a chess engine, probably because he has been unable to win the argument
that evolution is fact.
P.S. In his opinion, anyone that doesn't believe that evolution is a fact is a
mental moron.
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsYou say you are 68 and yet your 'defence' is adolescent. As everyone here knows, Proper Knob enjoys discussing evolution with fundamentalist Christians and has been doing it contentedly for as long as I can remember. To most 'neutrals' he runs rings around you in debate time and time again. You do not have to agree with me on that, but it is relevant to what his motivation is. He probably enjoys discussing it with more erudite and challenging opponents than you, but you're often the one fighting the creationist corner. So, he has no reason to "resort" to anything.
Proper Knob [...] resorted to attacking me as cheating on my chess games by using a chess engine, probably because he has been unable to win the argument
that evolution is fact.
Originally posted by Proper KnobBut if I were to take a test which is multiple choice and there were more than
The data showed a 65% matchup for the top choice engine move, your top 3 matches were around the 92%. When you consider that every chess world champion, and every correspondence world champion and even todays modern super GM's struggled to get above 85% something is amiss. Couple that with your claim that you are really only about 1500 OTB and your limit d also that [b]three independent people have come up with almost exactly the same results.[/b]
on correct answer in the choices, which sometimes happens on these multple
choice tests, I would be graded wrong unless I selected the best choice. Don't
you see a flaw in your grading system? It is certainly different from any that I
know of. And it appears you are also grading on a curve system. Surely, you
will admit that. 😏
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsSurely you're not suggesting that all chess engines are completely identical? The only way you could get a 100% match up rate would be if you used the same engine with a similar configuration.
But if I were to take a test which is multiple choice and there were more than
on correct answer in the choices, which sometimes happens on these multple
choice tests, I would be graded wrong unless I selected the best choice. Don't
you see a flaw in your grading system? It is certainly different from any that I
know of. And it appears you are also grading on a curve system. Surely, you
will admit that. 😏
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsWhat you are failing to grasp, again, is that humans don't play like computers. We can't make the calculations they can, therefore our play is different. It has been shown time and time again that the best human players ever, CC and OTB, don't match up wit computers when compared over a large sample.
But if I were to take a test which is multiple choice and there were more than
on correct answer in the choices, which sometimes happens on these multple
choice tests, I would be graded wrong unless I selected the best choice. Don't
you see a flaw in your grading system? It is certainly different from any that I
know of. And it appears you are also grading on a curve system. Surely, you
will admit that. 😏
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by VartiovuoriThere you go, another flaw. Chess engines are not identical. That brings up
Surely you're not suggesting that all chess engines are completely identical? The only way you could get a 100% match up rate would be if you used the same engine with a similar configuration.
another problem in proving chess engine usage. Which engine?
Originally posted by Proper KnobI see that you are going to be just as hard to reason with on this as you are on
What you are failing to grasp, [b]again, is that humans don't play like computers. We can't make the calculations they can, therefore our play is different. It has been shown time and time again that the best human players ever, CC and OTB, don't match up wit computers when compared over a large sample.[/b]
evolution vs. creation and probably anything else. You must be right, because you are Proper Knob.
P.S. You apparently are failing to grasp that humans program the computers
to think like humans and some humans can beat computer chess engines at
times.
11 Mar 12
Originally posted by RJHindsIs this a wind up?! What reasoning have you done? All you have resorted to when you can't answer any of my points is the usual 'evolutionary' line.
I see that you are going to be just as hard to reason with on this as you are on
evolution vs. creation and probably anything else. You must be right, because you are Proper Knob.
P.S. You apparently are failing to grasp that humans program the computers
to think like humans.
Do you understand that humans don't play like computers? A simple yes or no will suffice.