Nelson again

This forum is for general discussions and questions, including Collectors Corner and anything to do with Computer chess.

Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Fernando wrote:
mclane wrote:
Fernando wrote:
mclane wrote:It can be that the program in the Alexandra/Igor/grandmaster is stronger than spracklens 6502 machine from 1980, the Excalibur machines use h8 cpu.
This cpu boosts the program.

It's of course difficult to identify the programmer. Biggest problem imo is that these Excalibur machines do not show evaluation and search depth during search.
Alexandra does. depth rarely goes beyond 6 in middle game. Evaluation is decent.
My einstein chess wizard also Shows evaluation. But the strange thing is, it shows it always from the point of view of the opponent. I do not know many computers that do it that way. So when computer is 1 pawn ahead Einstein says -1 no matter if Einstein has white or black. It is also no difference if Einstein computes or not. E.g. Novag computer show Evals from their OWN point of view and Change sign when opponent is to move.

Igor and grandmaster do NOT show depth or Evals while computing.
You can ask info when it's humans move, but the. You interrupt permanent brain, next move computer begins search from beginning.
Ivan the Terrible, another Excalibur incarnation about which we have not discussed a thing, do show also moves, eval, etc.
OK, I keep reading about the differences in how the evaluation is what makes Igor etc different.

Try playing level 94 and 1. e4 e5 2. Ba6 and watch CXG Legend for about a minute by hitting INFO TWICE then ANALYSIS ONCE then finally INFO ONCE and you get the rotating display which shows the analysis.

If you watch it for a minute you will see that the rotating display takes 10 seconds to go through its sequence. Also you will see that the evaluation says 3.16 from the computer's perspective therefore after about a minute just stop by hitting move and the computer will now play 2. ... Nxa6. Therefore with LEGEND you can only evaluate moves while the computer is thinking.

With IVAN it is different because with IVAN you can only see the evaluated moves while you the human player is thinking, therefore you have to play moves 1. e4 e5 2. Ba6 now wait for sixty seconds and then press move. IVAN will now play 2. ... Nxa6.

Now immediately hit INFO BUTTON TWICE followed by more INFO BUTTON presses you will see the Evaluation 3.2.

Well 3.16 if you have two digits on the display would also equal 3.2 if you have 1 digit after the point available on your display so no difference here.

Now after you have played out IVAN's move 2. ... Nxa6 and after you have checked the display through repeated presses of the INFO key. Hit MOVE to get IVAN thinking again. You will see that the display starts thinking about its move. At this point while IVAN is thinking try to hit INFO key repeatedly. On my IVAN the display freezes and it gives you the feeling that it has seized. Well you can snap it out of this by hitting the MOVE key and it will respond by playing its move. After this it will continue to function normally again.

So therefore in summary:

1) Legend displays analysis while computer is thinking. Ivan displays analysis while human is thinking.
2) All Horvath's and Excalibur Ivan, Igor and Mirage use the repeated hitting of the INFO to get to their analysis.
3) Both show similar analysis but IVAN has 1 decimal behind the point and LEGEND has 2 decimals behind the point on their displays. Where LEGEND shows 3.16 and IVAN shows 3.2.
4) All Horvath's and Excalibur Ivan, Igor and Mirage, show the evaluation through the eyes of the computer. How many other programs that you know do this?
5) IVAN freezes when you try to hit INFO repeatedly while it is thinking. This kind of really makes me wonder if it is not searching for the missing command and it is no longer there. So the computer says "OK I am looking for the "ANALYSIS" button press. Where is it?" "Come on human press the analysis button!" "where is it?" The computer is frozen because it is looking for something that is not there. Now press "MOVE" again and IVAN snaps out of it.

So as a result even the analysis argument does not work for arguing against Horvath. It in actual fact continues to favor Horvath if you were all just spend a few minutes to think through all the similarities.

Sorry to disappoint regards
Nick
User avatar
mclane
Senior Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:04 am
Location: Luenen, germany, US of europe
Contact:

Post by mclane »

There is

Horvath program like regency and legend etc,
There is nelsons program like Igor and Gm.
And there is e,g, Einstein chess wizard program.

The later shows Evals and search depth and plays weaker then
Igor or regency.

And it shows Evals from the point of view of the player, not of the computer.
This is very different to what other dedicated units do.

Conclusion: there are 3
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

mclane wrote:There is

Horvath program like regency and legend etc,
There is nelsons program like Igor and Gm.
And there is e,g, Einstein chess wizard program.

The later shows Evals and search depth and plays weaker then
Igor or regency.

And it shows Evals from the point of view of the player, not of the computer.
This is very different to what other dedicated units do.

Conclusion: there are 3
Sorry we continue to disagree. Timeline does not cater for Nelson. Similarities confirm Horvath was taken as base. Sure they play different, I agree with you but everything still lies inside the boundaries of a Horvath starting point. Forget your Nelson theory it doesn't exist.

I will ask you what I asked Steve previously. You state 2 different programs inside Excalibur computers. In other words 2 different people (unless you have a split personality disorder) so in your opinion which one is Nelson if we assume you are correct?

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
mclane
Senior Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:04 am
Location: Luenen, germany, US of europe
Contact:

Post by mclane »

spacious_mind wrote:
mclane wrote:There is

Horvath program like regency and legend etc,
There is nelsons program like Igor and Gm.
And there is e,g, Einstein chess wizard program.

The later shows Evals and search depth and plays weaker then
Igor or regency.

And it shows Evals from the point of view of the player, not of the computer.
This is very different to what other dedicated units do.

Conclusion: there are 3
Sorry we continue to disagree. Timeline does not cater for Nelson. Similarities confirm Horvath was taken as base. Sure they play different, I agree with you but everything still lies inside the boundaries of a Horvath starting point. Forget your Nelson theory it doesn't exist.

I will ask you what I asked Steve previously. You state 2 different programs inside Excalibur computers. In other words 2 different people (unless you have a split personality disorder) so in your opinion which one is Nelson if we assume you are correct?

Best regards
Igor and Gm is the program that reminds on Nelson.
Regency, avenger, challenger legend etc are the horvath
Einstein chess wizard and phantom force are the 3rd program family
With search depth, Evals from players point of view and no permanent brain.
This seems the weakest program in the group.

Although it is the weakest, it does not play as unpositional as Igor/Gm.
Igor /Gm seems to have high search depth but less evaluation.
It plays a chess of the 70ties with the exception that it comes deep. Therefore we call it Nelson. It's the idea that somebody took the z80a program and converted it for the h8. Similar to taking it from the z80a and bringing it onto the 80c50 like in the fidelity the gambit.
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

mclane wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:
mclane wrote:There is

Horvath program like regency and legend etc,
There is nelsons program like Igor and Gm.
And there is e,g, Einstein chess wizard program.

The later shows Evals and search depth and plays weaker then
Igor or regency.

And it shows Evals from the point of view of the player, not of the computer.
This is very different to what other dedicated units do.

Conclusion: there are 3
Sorry we continue to disagree. Timeline does not cater for Nelson. Similarities confirm Horvath was taken as base. Sure they play different, I agree with you but everything still lies inside the boundaries of a Horvath starting point. Forget your Nelson theory it doesn't exist.

I will ask you what I asked Steve previously. You state 2 different programs inside Excalibur computers. In other words 2 different people (unless you have a split personality disorder) so in your opinion which one is Nelson if we assume you are correct?

Best regards
Igor and Gm is the program that reminds on Nelson.
Regency, avenger, challenger legend etc are the horvath
Einstein chess wizard and phantom force are the 3rd program family
With search depth, Evals from players point of view and no permanent brain.
This seems the weakest program in the group.

Although it is the weakest, it does not play as unpositional as Igor/Gm.
Igor /Gm seems to have high search depth but less evaluation.
It plays a chess of the 70ties with the exception that it comes deep. Therefore we call it Nelson. It's the idea that somebody took the z80a program and converted it for the h8. Similar to taking it from the z80a and bringing it onto the 80c50 like in the fidelity the gambit.
Hi Thorsten,

I understand the idea and it would be just wonderful Nostalgia, but honestly Nelson z80 program had such a huge amount of weakness and gaps that it wouldn't matter what you do with it, it wouldn't work. You would almost have to write a completely new program. You can place Nelson Endgame capabilities into faster machines than H8 and you would still lack the end game (I know Igor and Ivan have weaknesses here I agree, but it is not because of taking a Nelson program). The Horizon effect would still be there and many other gaps and weaknesses. It's a nostalgic dream but not reality. And now add to this the fact Mirage was created by Krypton, there is not much room here for nostalgia. Everything around Mirage and Ivan and therefore Igor by lineage defaults back to a Krypton starting point. Absolutely everything.

Now, since you favor Nelson for Igor etc. Let me ask you this very simple question. Why? if it where Nelson, would Nelson drop his baby that he created in favor of the dozens of later models from Excalibur from another person? Even this does not make any sense at all. All the Horvath's and Ivan/Igor etc seized to exist at the time when Krypton stopped to exist.

That's why I keep saying to forget about Nelson it's a nostalgic dream. Excalibur continued because they used and expanded upon the resources that were available from CXG (not Krypton, Eric White took Horvath program with him to Krypton) hence all the repeated same reconfigured model regurgitations that Excalibur provided through the years which continued on to the Einstein's of MB and familiar versions seen at Lexibook.

best regards,
Nick
User avatar
Fluppio
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2007 10:53 pm

Post by Fluppio »

Hi Nick,

i agree with you that the old Z80 program fe from Sensory Voice is too weak to bring it up to 1800+ ELO with a H8 processor. There must be some changes and new program routines in the Igor/GM.

As Steve always said, Nelson himself claims for programming these chess Computers from Excalibur. Therefore it's natural that Nelson is mentioned as the programmer. If it's true? I don't know too. But in my opinion it is clear that Igor/GM are not HORVATH programs. They Play totally different, with deep tactic search.

Horvath? His programs are more positional and very bad in tactical tests. I will do the Colditz test with Regency, too compare it with the Igor - done by Ian in the other Nelson thread.

Danielsen? He made only 4K an 16K programs in the eighties. These are often used in computers from Lexibook and of course Kryton/Systema/CXG. The 16K program has max. 1600 ELO.

Kittinger? Of course not. Excalibur Karpov is the only one.

Morsch? Never heard he is involved in Excalibur programs.

Taylor? His programs are too weak and they have a selective search, nothing tactical.

Rathsman? His last work was the Plymate Victoria in 89/90. Although his programs are strong in tactical tests like Igor/GM, I don't think this could match.

Donninger? He worked for David Levy, but in an interview he said his only work was the Tiger Grenadier.

So, is it Nelson or an unknown programmer?

Regards
Peter
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Fluppio wrote:Hi Nick,

i agree with you that the old Z80 program fe from Sensory Voice is too weak to bring it up to 1800+ ELO with a H8 processor. There must be some changes and new program routines in the Igor/GM.

As Steve always said, Nelson himself claims for programming these chess Computers from Excalibur. Therefore it's natural that Nelson is mentioned as the programmer. If it's true? I don't know too. But in my opinion it is clear that Igor/GM are not HORVATH programs. They Play totally different, with deep tactic search.

Horvath? His programs are more positional and very bad in tactical tests. I will do the Colditz test with Regency, too compare it with the Igor - done by Ian in the other Nelson thread.

Danielsen? He made only 4K an 16K programs in the eighties. These are often used in computers from Lexibook and of course Kryton/Systema/CXG. The 16K program has max. 1600 ELO.

Kittinger? Of course not. Excalibur Karpov is the only one.

Morsch? Never heard he is involved in Excalibur programs.

Taylor? His programs are too weak and they have a selective search, nothing tactical.

Rathsman? His last work was the Plymate Victoria in 89/90. Although his programs are strong in tactical tests like Igor/GM, I don't think this could match.

Donninger? He worked for David Levy, but in an interview he said his only work was the Tiger Grenadier.

So, is it Nelson or an unknown programmer?

Regards
Peter
Hi Peter,
I can theorize as well but it remains theory. I choose to believe Steve's conversations with Nelson and I also choose to believe Steve that Nelson and Samole invested heavily into CXG. Especially because it sort of fits well into the CCS timeline. I am a bit suspect about recollections from 6 years or so previously when someone asks you a questions as Steve did. Nelson of course did not lie he was a leader in the Excalibur pack, so he was heavily involved with decisions and designs and programming connection points and features etc. Therefore it is quite easy to state one general thing that then gets interpreted for into a thousand other things. It is fuzzy.

It is very clear that Krypton as you can see from their product range that they took Horvath with them. Horvath was not available from CXG when CXG started selling again through the Dutch distributor Tasco. Just look at the sold range from CXG it is listed in the CSS report.

Just as I believe Steve, I also believe another esteemed forum member who informs me without proof I should add, that in correspondence with David Levy it was indicated by him that a "Famous" programmer was used.

Now how do you interpret that?

Well I choose to believe and you are all not fools you can all see this too that everything around the chess program stems from previous Horvath computers. You cannot possibly argue this.

But who was the famous programmer engaged? For me there are only two choices because under the heading "famous programmer" I doubt very much that David Levy would reference Nelson as such, a person who has not published anything in years. So you narrow it down to two:

1) Horvath
2) Danielsen

With both you don't agree with me. But again I say that they are much more likely that any other choice.

1) You cannot convince me that playing around inside the programs whether Levy did it, Horvath himself or someone else when there are already 100,000 Billion combinations available for the customer, that you cannot change the style appropriately. So what do you think can be done if you have complete access to the program itself?
2) Danielsen is the next possibility. He was part of friends and family. Also his program in a H8 would be absolutely be just as strong as what you see with Mirage, Ivan and Igor. Have you also noticed that from all the programmers I have shown tests for so far, that his program is the only one so far (albeit in weaker tested computers) that has that magic ability to play in Test Game 1 with the the magic moves 4. ... e5 and the repeated white d4 moves? I know you will say it is just another coincidence.

So there you have it your two candidates. Others just don't exist.

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
mclane
Senior Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:04 am
Location: Luenen, germany, US of europe
Contact:

Post by mclane »

spacious_mind wrote:
mclane wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:
mclane wrote:There is

Horvath program like regency and legend etc,
There is nelsons program like Igor and Gm.
And there is e,g, Einstein chess wizard program.

The later shows Evals and search depth and plays weaker then
Igor or regency.

And it shows Evals from the point of view of the player, not of the computer.
This is very different to what other dedicated units do.

Conclusion: there are 3
Sorry we continue to disagree. Timeline does not cater for Nelson. Similarities confirm Horvath was taken as base. Sure they play different, I agree with you but everything still lies inside the boundaries of a Horvath starting point. Forget your Nelson theory it doesn't exist.

I will ask you what I asked Steve previously. You state 2 different programs inside Excalibur computers. In other words 2 different people (unless you have a split personality disorder) so in your opinion which one is Nelson if we assume you are correct?

Best regards
Igor and Gm is the program that reminds on Nelson.
Regency, avenger, challenger legend etc are the horvath
Einstein chess wizard and phantom force are the 3rd program family
With search depth, Evals from players point of view and no permanent brain.
This seems the weakest program in the group.

Although it is the weakest, it does not play as unpositional as Igor/Gm.
Igor /Gm seems to have high search depth but less evaluation.
It plays a chess of the 70ties with the exception that it comes deep. Therefore we call it Nelson. It's the idea that somebody took the z80a program and converted it for the h8. Similar to taking it from the z80a and bringing it onto the 80c50 like in the fidelity the gambit.
Hi Thorsten,

I understand the idea and it would be just wonderful Nostalgia, but honestly Nelson z80 program had such a huge amount of weakness and gaps that it wouldn't matter what you do with it, it wouldn't work. You would almost have to write a completely new program. You can place Nelson Endgame capabilities into faster machines than H8 and you would still lack the end game (I know Igor and Ivan have weaknesses here I agree, but it is not because of taking a Nelson program). The Horizon effect would still be there and many other gaps and weaknesses. It's a nostalgic dream but not reality. And now add to this the fact Mirage was created by Krypton, there is not much room here for nostalgia. Everything around Mirage and Ivan and therefore Igor by lineage defaults back to a Krypton starting point. Absolutely everything.

Now, since you favor Nelson for Igor etc. Let me ask you this very simple question. Why? if it where Nelson, would Nelson drop his baby that he created in favor of the dozens of later models from Excalibur from another person? Even this does not make any sense at all. All the Horvath's and Ivan/Igor etc seized to exist at the time when Krypton stopped to exist.

That's why I keep saying to forget about Nelson it's a nostalgic dream. Excalibur continued because they used and expanded upon the resources that were available from CXG (not Krypton, Eric White took Horvath program with him to Krypton) hence all the repeated same reconfigured model regurgitations that Excalibur provided through the years which continued on to the Einstein's of MB and familiar versions seen at Lexibook.

best regards,
Hi, you asked me why. First Igor/Gm play a very strange chess. I have the feeling I never saw this kind of playing behaviour from another dedicated chess computer I have. It reminds me on the first machines that were available. It seems very tactical. It's completely different from the horvath machines, and also from the later Einstein/phantom force stuff.
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
User avatar
mclane
Senior Member
Posts: 1600
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 9:04 am
Location: Luenen, germany, US of europe
Contact:

Post by mclane »

spacious_mind wrote:
Fluppio wrote:Hi Nick,

i agree with you that the old Z80 program fe from Sensory Voice is too weak to bring it up to 1800+ ELO with a H8 processor. There must be some changes and new program routines in the Igor/GM.

As Steve always said, Nelson himself claims for programming these chess Computers from Excalibur. Therefore it's natural that Nelson is mentioned as the programmer. If it's true? I don't know too. But in my opinion it is clear that Igor/GM are not HORVATH programs. They Play totally different, with deep tactic search.

Horvath? His programs are more positional and very bad in tactical tests. I will do the Colditz test with Regency, too compare it with the Igor - done by Ian in the other Nelson thread.

Danielsen? He made only 4K an 16K programs in the eighties. These are often used in computers from Lexibook and of course Kryton/Systema/CXG. The 16K program has max. 1600 ELO.

Kittinger? Of course not. Excalibur Karpov is the only one.

Morsch? Never heard he is involved in Excalibur programs.

Taylor? His programs are too weak and they have a selective search, nothing tactical.

Rathsman? His last work was the Plymate Victoria in 89/90. Although his programs are strong in tactical tests like Igor/GM, I don't think this could match.

Donninger? He worked for David Levy, but in an interview he said his only work was the Tiger Grenadier.

So, is it Nelson or an unknown programmer?

Regards
Peter
Hi Peter,
I can theorize as well but it remains theory. I choose to believe Steve's conversations with Nelson and I also choose to believe Steve that Nelson and Samole invested heavily into CXG. Especially because it sort of fits well into the CCS timeline. I am a bit suspect about recollections from 6 years or so previously when someone asks you a questions as Steve did. Nelson of course did not lie he was a leader in the Excalibur pack, so he was heavily involved with decisions and designs and programming connection points and features etc. Therefore it is quite easy to state one general thing that then gets interpreted for into a thousand other things. It is fuzzy.

It is very clear that Krypton as you can see from their product range that they took Horvath with them. Horvath was not available from CXG when CXG started selling again through the Dutch distributor Tasco. Just look at the sold range from CXG it is listed in the CSS report.

Just as I believe Steve, I also believe another esteemed forum member who informs me without proof I should add, that in correspondence with David Levy it was indicated by him that a "Famous" programmer was used.

Now how do you interpret that?

Well I choose to believe and you are all not fools you can all see this too that everything around the chess program stems from previous Horvath computers. You cannot possibly argue this.

But who was the famous programmer engaged? For me there are only two choices because under the heading "famous programmer" I doubt very much that David Levy would reference Nelson as such, a person who has not published anything in years. So you narrow it down to two:

1) Horvath
2) Danielsen

With both you don't agree with me. But again I say that they are much more likely that any other choice.

1) You cannot convince me that playing around inside the programs whether Levy did it, Horvath himself or someone else when there are already 100,000 Billion combinations available for the customer, that you cannot change the style appropriately. So what do you think can be done if you have complete access to the program itself?
2) Danielsen is the next possibility. He was part of friends and family. Also his program in a H8 would be absolutely be just as strong as what you see with Mirage, Ivan and Igor. Have you also noticed that from all the programmers I have shown tests for so far, that his program is the only one so far (albeit in weaker tested computers) that has that magic ability to play in Test Game 1 with the the magic moves 4. ... e5 and the repeated white d4 moves? I know you will say it is just another coincidence.

So there you have it your two candidates. Others just don't exist.

Best regards
We know how Kaare danielsens program plays . It also plays a strong tactical chess. But it has 16 kb. We could try to relate the colditz test results of the advanced star chess with the results of Igor/Gm.
What seems like a fairy tale today may be reality tomorrow.
Here we have a fairy tale of the day after tomorrow....
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

spacious_mind wrote:


But who was the famous programmer engaged? For me there are only two choices because under the heading "famous programmer" I doubt very much that David Levy would reference Nelson as such, a person who has not published anything in years. So you narrow it down to two:

1) Horvath
2) Danielsen
You Must be kidding Nick
i think the complete opposite is true actually

you actually think that Levy would not consider Nelson a famous Programmer when he programmed the very FIRST commercial Chess Program?
a fact Levy would be acutely aware of given he was selling Chess Computers at basically the same time and competing against him and Fidelity??
Instead he meant Horvath and Danielson??
they might be known to Levy but he would hardly call them "famous"
even now i think the word Famous would not describe them correctly
now i dont know who Levy meant but when comparing the fame of these three programmers its not even close

No Way Jose Regards
Steve
Last edited by Steve B on Sun Jan 18, 2015 9:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Steve B wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:


But who was the famous programmer engaged? For me there are only two choices because under the heading "famous programmer" I doubt very much that David Levy would reference Nelson as such, a person who has not published anything in years. So you narrow it down to two:

1) Horvath
2) Danielsen
You Must be kidding Nick
i think the complete opposite is true actually

you actually think that Levy would not consider Nelson a famous Programmer when he programmed the very FIRST commercial Chess Program?
a fact Levy would be acutely aware of given he was selling Chess Computers at basically the same time and competing against him and Fidelity??
Instead he meant Horvath and Danielson??
they might be known to Levy but he would hardly call them famous
even now i think the word Famous would not describe them correctly

No Way Jose Regards
Steve
No Steve, I don't think he considered Nelson under that comment. Here is why. If it were Nelson then that program would have survived through the Excalibur regurgitations and it didn't. It disappeared with Krypton for ever. The regurgitated programmer however continued for the next ten years.

Therefore he was not considered and it cannot be his because it didn't survive the Krypton disappearance.

Had it been the Mirage program that survived for the next ten years then yes I believe Levy would have thought of Nelson. But it didn't survive so no he did not consider Nelson under that statement.

I comes back to the question I asked which program is Nelsons (assuming no split personality disorder) :)

Best regards

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

spacious_mind wrote:

No Steve, I don't think he considered Nelson under that comment. Here is why. If it were Nelson then that program would have survived through the Excalibur regurgitations and it didn't. It disappeared with Krypton for ever. The regurgitated programmer however continued for the next ten years.

Therefore he was not considered and it cannot be his because it didn't survive the Krypton disappearance.

Had it been the Mirage program that survived for the next ten years then yes I believe Levy would have thought of Nelson. But it didn't survive so no he did not consider Nelson under that statement.

I comes back to the question I asked which program is Nelsons (assuming no split personality disorder) :)

Best regards

Best regards
Well i guess we can debate what Levy Meant when he used the word "Famous"
i doubt he would use it to describe a programmer whose program was more recent or more enduring..
i imagine he meant it to mean"well known"
which Nelson was ...even 10 years later and even 20 years later
Even Now Regards
Steve
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Steve B wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:

No Steve, I don't think he considered Nelson under that comment. Here is why. If it were Nelson then that program would have survived through the Excalibur regurgitations and it didn't. It disappeared with Krypton for ever. The regurgitated programmer however continued for the next ten years.

Therefore he was not considered and it cannot be his because it didn't survive the Krypton disappearance.

Had it been the Mirage program that survived for the next ten years then yes I believe Levy would have thought of Nelson. But it didn't survive so no he did not consider Nelson under that statement.

I comes back to the question I asked which program is Nelsons (assuming no split personality disorder) :)

Best regards

Best regards
Well i guess we can debate what Levy Meant when he used the word "Famous"
i doubt he would use it to describe a programmer whose program was more recent or more enduring..
i imagine he meant it to mean"well known"
which Nelson was ...even 10 years later and even 20 years later
Even Now Regards
Steve
You right Steve, I quoted wrongly and the actual correct statement was "very well known programmer".

And this of course applies to all the chess programmers we know since they are all "very well known" :) So you have to work through deduction and what was readily available to the Hong Kong Connection at that time.

Best regards
Nick
User avatar
Steve B
Site Admin
Posts: 10140
Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 10:02 am
Location: New York City USofA
Contact:

Post by Steve B »

spacious_mind wrote:
Steve B wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:

No Steve, I don't think he considered Nelson under that comment. Here is why. If it were Nelson then that program would have survived through the Excalibur regurgitations and it didn't. It disappeared with Krypton for ever. The regurgitated programmer however continued for the next ten years.

Therefore he was not considered and it cannot be his because it didn't survive the Krypton disappearance.

Had it been the Mirage program that survived for the next ten years then yes I believe Levy would have thought of Nelson. But it didn't survive so no he did not consider Nelson under that statement.

I comes back to the question I asked which program is Nelsons (assuming no split personality disorder) :)

Best regards

Best regards
Well i guess we can debate what Levy Meant when he used the word "Famous"
i doubt he would use it to describe a programmer whose program was more recent or more enduring..
i imagine he meant it to mean"well known"
which Nelson was ...even 10 years later and even 20 years later
Even Now Regards
Steve
You right Steve, I quoted wrongly and the actual correct statement was "very well known programmer".

And this of course applies to all the chess programmers we know since they are all "very well known" :) So you have to work through deduction and what was readily available to the Hong Kong Connection at that time.

Best regards
:P
i bet if you ask anyone to prepare a list of 5 Very Well Known dedicated chess Programmers..Nelson would appear on almost every list.. and the other two ..on no list
anyway...this reminds me of the debate we had a few years ago where you argued that Efim Geller had more of an impact on Chess then Bobby Fischer
My reaction at that time was similar to this time..
Efim Geller???

Good Stuff Regards
Steve
Last edited by Steve B on Sun Jan 18, 2015 10:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
spacious_mind
Senior Member
Posts: 4000
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 10:20 pm
Location: Alabama
Contact:

Post by spacious_mind »

Steve B wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:
Steve B wrote:
spacious_mind wrote:

No Steve, I don't think he considered Nelson under that comment. Here is why. If it were Nelson then that program would have survived through the Excalibur regurgitations and it didn't. It disappeared with Krypton for ever. The regurgitated programmer however continued for the next ten years.

Therefore he was not considered and it cannot be his because it didn't survive the Krypton disappearance.

Had it been the Mirage program that survived for the next ten years then yes I believe Levy would have thought of Nelson. But it didn't survive so no he did not consider Nelson under that statement.

I comes back to the question I asked which program is Nelsons (assuming no split personality disorder) :)

Best regards

Best regards
Well i guess we can debate what Levy Meant when he used the word "Famous"
i doubt he would use it to describe a programmer whose program was more recent or more enduring..
i imagine he meant it to mean"well known"
which Nelson was ...even 10 years later and even 20 years later
Even Now Regards
Steve
You right Steve, I quoted wrongly and the actual correct statement was "very well known programmer".

And this of course applies to all the chess programmers we know since they are all "very well known" :) So you have to work through deduction and what was readily available to the Hong Kong Connection at that time.

Best regards
:P
i bet if you ask anyone to prepare a list of 5 Very Well Known dedciated chess Programmers Nelson would appear on almost every list and the other two ..on no list
anyway...this reminds me of the debate we had a few years ago where you argued that Efim Geller had more of an impact on Chess then Bobby Fischer
My reaction at that time was similar to this time..
Efim Geller???

Good Stuff Regards
Steve
Yes! I notice you didn't fall for me asking you to pick the Nelson program. I think you knew where I would be heading.... regards :P
Nick
Post Reply