Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 12:52:08 05/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 13, 2001 at 13:38:24, Christophe Theron wrote: >On May 13, 2001 at 10:25:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 13, 2001 at 03:06:32, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>I think you overestimate widely the financial value of WCCC+WMCCC. Compared to >>>the publicity of the event, my opinion is that it is peanuts. Having these >>>titles is nice, and I'm not trying to belittle the merits of the owner of these >>>titles, but the financial reality is something else... >> >> >>I think the financial reality is better than you speculate. Why? Because >>I have watched the "dirty tricks" used over the years in WMCCC events to >>win at all costs... >> >>And when you factor that in vs a potential loss to (say) deep fritz, then yes, >>the titles probably mean a lot. > > > >Well it looks like the news today give me a point, somehow. > >If being the World Champion is so interesting financially, then why is Millenium >giving up, when it is selling the World Champion program? > >It doesn't fit, does it? I honestly don't know. I've been around computer chess _so_ long, watching the various practices of commercial chess vendors, that _nothing_ surprises me anymore. The only thing I am pretty sure about is that there is more to this than meets the eye. IE who "quit" on who here? Who signed what to terminate the deal? Will anyone ever talk about it? Who knows. And really, who cares? :) > >Others companies, which are not selling a World Champion program, are doing >well, while Millenium gives up and let the World Champion programmer fly away. > >Isn't it telling you something really interesting about the commercial value of >owning TWO World Titles simultaneously? Or maybe it is telling me something about the incompetence of the marketing people that should have been taking advantage of this? IE in the old days, Fidelity used to take out full-page ads in Chess Life. Novag would respond when they had something better to claim. Back and forth. Nobody knows much of anything about shredder except for the people familiar with the ICCA tournaments. > > > >>Me too. I was simply "speculating" as I really don't see any other reason >>except for either (a) what I gave above or (b) I am strongly pissed about >>the qualifier concept when my program owns both ICCA titles, and I am not >>about to stoop so low as to admit that we need a qualifier event to pick the >>challenger for Kramnik. > > > >And you really believed in this argument? :) > > > I really believe(d) that either is _possible_. Not that there could not be other explanations as well... > >>Other than those two, I can't imagine why this happened... > > > >Knowing that Millenium is giving up, knowing that Weiner KNEW it was going out >of business when BGN contacted him, now we can imagine what happened... > >Yesterday I said we were missing an important part of the puzzle, and today I >think we have it. > > Very possibly. If this was done behind SMK's back, it is pretty poor... > > > Christophe
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.