Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 09:57 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 446
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???

Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.

I have great difficulty in understanding why. From what others have
said, it would appear to be a brain-dead chess program which plays bad
chess very slowly. There are vapor ware prizes, since you do not
actually get any money.

Why not do what I do with software when it is poor - just forget it and
find decent software? There are plenty of decent chess programs around,
so what is the attraction of playing a bad one multiple times? If you
want to play human players why not just use a decent chess server?

If it was an open-source program, I could see the point in reporting
bugs if the developer is sufficiently competent to fix them. But in this
case it's clear the software is closed source with a developer/salesman
who seems to be totally clueless as to how software should be developed.

Please enlighten me to the attraction. I'm obviously missing something.

--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
  #2   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 01:41 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2005
Posts: 138
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???


Dave (from the UK) wrote:
Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.

I have great difficulty in understanding why. From what others have
said, it would appear to be a brain-dead chess program which plays bad
chess very slowly. There are vapor ware prizes, since you do not
actually get any money.

Why not do what I do with software when it is poor - just forget it and
find decent software? There are plenty of decent chess programs around,
so what is the attraction of playing a bad one multiple times? If you
want to play human players why not just use a decent chess server?

If it was an open-source program, I could see the point in reporting
bugs if the developer is sufficiently competent to fix them. But in this
case it's clear the software is closed source with a developer/salesman
who seems to be totally clueless as to how software should be developed.

Please enlighten me to the attraction. I'm obviously missing something.


I suppose it's due mainly to Sanny's repeated claims that he has
finally gotten all the bugs out and now his program is invincible.
People want to prove him wrong.

  #3   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 06:59 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 446
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???

wrote:
Dave (from the UK) wrote:

Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.

I have great difficulty in understanding why. From what others have
said, it would appear to be a brain-dead chess program which plays bad
chess very slowly. There are vapor ware prizes, since you do not
actually get any money.


Please enlighten me to the attraction. I'm obviously missing something.



I suppose it's due mainly to Sanny's repeated claims that he has
finally gotten all the bugs out and now his program is invincible.
People want to prove him wrong.


As a matter of interest, who are *you* personally trying trying to prove
this to? Obviously you can't speak for others, but I'm interested if you
are trying to prove it to yourself, Sanny, or some other group of
individuals such as readers of the newsgroups.

How long would you consider trying to prove this for - another day,
week, month, year, decade ...?

I would have personally thought there would come a time (and I feel that
time has long since passed) where it is best to say to Sanny that *he*
should prove the fact he has removed most of the bugs, by entering it
into a computer chess tournament and getting a half-reasonable score.
Or perhaps put his money where his mouth is, and have a competition in
which the looser pays some money to the winner. (not virtual money like
Sanny's prizes).

I think given the history, the onus should be on Sanny to prove his
program plays well, rather than you to disprove it.
--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:

Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
  #4   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 07:34 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,931
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???


Dave (from the UK) wrote:
wrote:
Dave (from the UK) wrote:

Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.

I have great difficulty in understanding why. From what others have
said, it would appear to be a brain-dead chess program which plays bad
chess very slowly. There are vapor ware prizes, since you do not
actually get any money.


Please enlighten me to the attraction. I'm obviously missing something.



I suppose it's due mainly to Sanny's repeated claims that he has
finally gotten all the bugs out and now his program is invincible.
People want to prove him wrong.


As a matter of interest, who are *you* personally trying trying to prove
this to? Obviously you can't speak for others, but I'm interested if you
are trying to prove it to yourself, Sanny, or some other group of
individuals such as readers of the newsgroups.

How long would you consider trying to prove this for - another day,
week, month, year, decade ...?


Such questions have never occurred to me.

I would have personally thought there would come a time (and I feel that
time has long since passed) where it is best to say to Sanny that *he*
should prove the fact he has removed most of the bugs, by entering it
into a computer chess tournament and getting a half-reasonable score.
Or perhaps put his money where his mouth is, and have a competition in
which the looser pays some money to the winner. (not virtual money like
Sanny's prizes).

I think given the history, the onus should be on Sanny to prove his
program plays well, rather than you to disprove it.


A quite reasonable opinion.

--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:

Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)


  #5   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 08:15 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 567
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???


Dave (from the UK) wrote:

I think given the history, the onus should be on Sanny to prove his
program plays well, rather than you to disprove it.


I think for some it is an inside joke; they know this isn't even up to
the programs of the 1980s; the only way anyone can lose is by being
bored for 6 hours waiting for the thing to move. And yet Sanny seems to
think his program is really good, and getting better.

Thats the only part I don't get - it seems that it takes hours to carry
out the joke by playing games that can only ruin your OTB play.

Could Sanny's program draw this position as white?

Kb3 Rd5 Qf8 a2
Kb5 Qa8 Ra5 Rc5 Bg8 Nb6 Nc6 a3

My computer flashes 0.00 in less than a second on just about any
commercial program, and once a human sees the trick, which requires a
modicum of calculation, its easy too. But I bet Sanny will never get
his program to where it could find the draw. It would probably always
make the first, "obvious" move - and take an hour to do it.



  #6   Report Post  
Old September 5th 06, 09:20 PM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
Q Q is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Sep 2006
Posts: 3
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???

I for sure like this soap to continue. It's fun to read!

Although it's getting a bit boring to read the spam emails which have

A LINK TO MY CHESS SITE

A LINK TO MY CHESS SITE

A LINK TO MY CHESS SITE

in every post.

I would say one link would be sufficiŽnt. Even when you're just spamming
your website. LOL


  #9   Report Post  
Old September 6th 06, 05:30 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Aug 2006
Posts: 9
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???

Dave (from the UK) wrote:

Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.


Oh, and here I was thinking it was the same guy with several addresses
spamming the ng.

Martin S

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access
  #10   Report Post  
Old September 6th 06, 10:39 AM posted to rec.games.chess.analysis,rec.games.chess.misc,rec.games.chess.computer
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jul 2006
Posts: 446
Default Why bother with Sanny's program ???

Martin S wrote:
Dave (from the UK) wrote:


Reading these newsgroups, there are countless posts about Sanny's web
site & chess program by several people.



Oh, and here I was thinking it was the same guy with several addresses
spamming the ng.

Martin S

--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access


There may be some of that, but based on the IP addresses, I don't think
that is much of an issue. The person calling himself 'Sanny' has an
Indian IP address, which ties in with the place he wants you to send
your money.


--
Dave (from the UK)

Please note my email address changes periodically to avoid spam.
It is always of the form:
Hitting reply will work for a few months only - later set it manually.

http://witm.sourceforge.net/ (Web based Mathematica front end)
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why bother with Sanny's program ??? Dave (from the UK) rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 88 September 25th 06 06:17 AM
Sanny's ^&*($!% program nailed me AGAIN! help bot rec.games.chess.misc (Chess General) 0 September 2nd 06 07:50 AM
Did the Polgar Training Program help the Woman's Olympiad Team? Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 7 April 13th 06 03:15 PM
From the USCF Forum - Susan Polgar All-American Girls Program Sam Sloan alt.chess (Alternative Chess Group) 10 March 4th 06 12:53 AM
Can anyone beat this Chess Program and provide analysis. Taylor Kingston rec.games.chess.analysis (Chess Analysis) 6 February 28th 06 06:58 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:31 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017