In article .com,
raylopez99 wrote:

Don't confuse the PSEUDO-chess scientists and programmers answers on
this thread with REAL answers. Keep in mind I program as a hobby,
have an IQ of over 140, and am a successful and quite wealthy
businessman.

I've got to level with you. It always bothers me when somebody starts an
answer to a simple question by attacking people who disagree with him
and then puffing up his own irrelevant credentials.

Now to get to the point of your questions: I don't know.

Ok. But since you agree it's all intuition and hunches, don't you think
you should be a little more open to the possibility of being wrong?

Personally, I'm not convinced that 12 ply is anywhere near sufficient. I
also think the folly of your insistence of normalization being
sufficient is illustrated by the example that this analysis process
would rate a program that beat crafty-at-12-ply as being worse than
crafty-at-12-ply. Since all of the players evaluated would demolish
crafty-at-12-ply, this strikes me as a near-fatal flaw.

-Ron