A Talkchess thread: Misinformation being spread
Posted: Mon Jan 10, 2011 11:43 pm
Members, look here http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.ph ... 95&t=37562
Clearly my comparison was amongst Naum 4.x, Deep Shredder 12, and Rybka 2.3.2a and not Rybka 3! Some, if not all, would recall both Naum 4.1 or 4.2 and Deep Shredder12 passed Rybka 2.3.2a.
Let's follow the time-line provided by a CCRL tester. Since both DS12 and Naum 4.1 or 4.2 were released in 2009, this would've placed them 2nd to 3rd to Rybka 3. This did not happen. Instead, when Naum 4.x and DS12 overtook Rybka 2.3.2a, they were still placed below Rybka 2.3.2a! Not the current listing excerpt shown in the link CCC link above. Clearly, the current CCRL list posted by a user there was not shown to the public. Even the ELO is still ridiculously skewed. But that's long ago. This is about how CCRL refuses to show engines that are stronger than Rybka. The tactics (if this is even worth calling it one) is to delay the true results of stronger engines than Rybka 2.3.2a till a stronger version of Rybka takes the lead.....then the public can now see the long overdue results that should have been shown at the time of concern. Phew! Somehow, I get the feeling that this CCRL tester feels if things can be twisted to fit what suits their agenda (which we all know what that is) as opposed to actual events that this would make the truth about them go away.
Just so the issue is very clear, why didn't the CCRL show, at the relevant & valid time, Naum 4.x and DS12 overtaking Rybka 2.3.2a? Why wait later just to show it when Rybka 3 later took reign? Of course, I personally don't want answers from them, as this is no longer of relevance in current time period. They can feed the public their "thoughts and perception". And on this, some claim they weren't aware that Naum 4.x and DS12 surpassed Rybka 2.3.2a! Shocked but not surpirse. Maybe it's suiting and easier to blind one's self to the truth when Naum4.x and DS12 overtook Rybka 2.3.2a. I understand....if I was exclusively a "Rybka fan boy", I would turn a blind eye to the truth and even put lies to it.
Maybe the "reason why no one has bothered to correct me since my post of 1 week ago" is because others remember and saw what CCRL was doing when Naum4.x and DS12 finally passed Rybka in ELO?
As for my big, grand agenda, I guess since I don't bow-down and worship & support Rybka exclusively, even to the point of covering the truth about other engines, then I am an outcast with a diabolic agenda. Yes! That must be it.
Clearly my comparison was amongst Naum 4.x, Deep Shredder 12, and Rybka 2.3.2a and not Rybka 3! Some, if not all, would recall both Naum 4.1 or 4.2 and Deep Shredder12 passed Rybka 2.3.2a.
Let's follow the time-line provided by a CCRL tester. Since both DS12 and Naum 4.1 or 4.2 were released in 2009, this would've placed them 2nd to 3rd to Rybka 3. This did not happen. Instead, when Naum 4.x and DS12 overtook Rybka 2.3.2a, they were still placed below Rybka 2.3.2a! Not the current listing excerpt shown in the link CCC link above. Clearly, the current CCRL list posted by a user there was not shown to the public. Even the ELO is still ridiculously skewed. But that's long ago. This is about how CCRL refuses to show engines that are stronger than Rybka. The tactics (if this is even worth calling it one) is to delay the true results of stronger engines than Rybka 2.3.2a till a stronger version of Rybka takes the lead.....then the public can now see the long overdue results that should have been shown at the time of concern. Phew! Somehow, I get the feeling that this CCRL tester feels if things can be twisted to fit what suits their agenda (which we all know what that is) as opposed to actual events that this would make the truth about them go away.
Just so the issue is very clear, why didn't the CCRL show, at the relevant & valid time, Naum 4.x and DS12 overtaking Rybka 2.3.2a? Why wait later just to show it when Rybka 3 later took reign? Of course, I personally don't want answers from them, as this is no longer of relevance in current time period. They can feed the public their "thoughts and perception". And on this, some claim they weren't aware that Naum 4.x and DS12 surpassed Rybka 2.3.2a! Shocked but not surpirse. Maybe it's suiting and easier to blind one's self to the truth when Naum4.x and DS12 overtook Rybka 2.3.2a. I understand....if I was exclusively a "Rybka fan boy", I would turn a blind eye to the truth and even put lies to it.
Maybe the "reason why no one has bothered to correct me since my post of 1 week ago" is because others remember and saw what CCRL was doing when Naum4.x and DS12 finally passed Rybka in ELO?
As for my big, grand agenda, I guess since I don't bow-down and worship & support Rybka exclusively, even to the point of covering the truth about other engines, then I am an outcast with a diabolic agenda. Yes! That must be it.
