In article ,
JohnnyT wrote:

Wow, that word. That is the key of the whole thing. Lack of blunder is
by a long way, in my mind, and I think in many's, a long long way from
the word "accuracy".

And some of the questions had to do with #1 move correlation. Which
again raises the question of "accuracy". And not of blunders.

I think that Crafty-12 as an arbiter of accuracy, is a pretty tough row
to hoe.

The even bigger problem is leaping from "accuracy" to "greatness," which
is the claim of some people.

Accuracy may be a component of greatness (and, in fact, it certainly is)
but I don't think very many people would consider it the sole defining
quality of greatness.

I think there are many other qualities, which I don't think even
RayLopez can claim Crafty-12 is capable of measuring, which go into
greatness. These include, but are not limited to:

Combativeness, contributions to theory, originality, number of
brilliancies, and performance under pressure.

And I'd do this myself, if I had the tools to do so easily, but I'd be
fascinated to see the Crafty-12 evaluations of Tal and Botvinnik based
entirely on their first match. Does anybody have a way of setting up a
computer to do this automatically?

-Ron