Author: Mark Young
Date: 13:59:04 09/17/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 17, 1998 at 15:39:45, Moritz Berger wrote:
>I am happy to report that the Nunn test of 10 opening positions developed by GM
>Dr. John Nunn now has also been declared to be an independent (not intentionally
>biased towards particular programs) means of comparing programs by Ossi Weiner,
>distributor of Genius, Shredder, Nimzo and M-Chess.
>
>While this does say nothing about the general viability of such an approach, one
>of the most vocal critics of the Nunn test now has stated in an interview with
>the German Computer Schach und Spiele Magazin that the story [about cheating
>etc.] had been ended in a "satisfactory way".
>
>Here's the quote from CSS June/July 1998 issue, page 40 ("Respect for
>Grandmaster Nunn - an interview with Ossi Weiner”):
>[translation done by my humble self, quoted with permission of CSS editor in
>chief Frederic Friedel]:
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>
>CSS: The test was developed already in 1996, one year before Fritz 5 was
>released.
>
>Weiner: I didn’t know this. Only now I learned that the positions of the Nunn
>test have been available since February 1997 when they were announced in an
>article in CSS (the positions have been available for all interested readers
>since then from CSS magazine). Myself and many others have overlooked this fact.
>I assumed that Chessbase got the positions much earlier than its competitors.
>
>CSS: Not at all. Chessbase, too, at first ignored the test. Only after the first
>games became known it caught their attention.
>
>Weiner: Nevertheless you must concede that not everything went smoothly at the
>beginning. I would have preferred if the CSS editors had sent the positions
>already early in 1997 to all important programmers. This would have killed this
>whole discussion right from the start. Meanwhile I now had an opportunity to
>talk about this with Frans Morsch. He assured me that Fritz 5 has not been tuned
>on the Nunn test. That ends this story for me in a satisfactory way.
>
>CSS: So you no longer insist that the Nunn test is a cheat, that Dr. John was
>acting together with ChessBase?
>
>Weiner: It was never my intention to claim that Grandmaster John Nunn cheated
>and manipulated the test. The opposite is true, I feel a high esteem for
>Grandmaster Nunn and I don’t understand how you arrived at this strange
>interpretation of my words.
>
>---------------------------------------------------
>
>
>Moritz
Its nice to see that some people can still look at facts and admit they were
wrong, even if it takes them a while. On the other hand some people have a bit
more foam to spew out of their mouth before they regain their sanity.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.