Author: Theo van der Storm
Date: 14:36:41 08/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 2001 at 15:49:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 29, 2001 at 23:58:38, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>Before defining the terms, let's decide why. >> >>The reason to have amateur and professional is to sock it to C. on the >>entry fees. I like to think the most important reason is, to make participating in an event more interesting to amateur players, who haven't been in the field as long as you guys at the top of this message, but on second thought I don't think it :-) >>The reason C. should be socked is that they make a lot of money if they >>win a title, they will probably usually win a title, and they are generally >>already paying a lot of money for stuff anyway. >> >>The problem is to figure out a way that you can sock C. without socking >>some college student. If you sock the college student, the student will not >>attend the tournament. >> >>European college student, of course. American college students can't go, >>because the trip costs too much already anyway. >> >>Another problem is that you don't want to do the full-sock on someone who is >>selling their thing but is just starting out. >> >>Another problem is what to do about Bob. He's not professional but he can >>diddle with chess crap a lot, so his program is good. A related problem is what >>to do about me, since I'm a pretty heavy duty guy even though I'm amateur. I >>think we should get the amateur rate even though we are serious. Amateur >>shouldn't mean "newbie", and Bob, even though he gets career points for doing >>Crafty (I suspect), shouldn't be considered professional. >> >>A professional is someone who is established and who is selling chess programs >>for real, as in significant money, significant business.... >> >>Semi-professional is someone who's probably got a job or who is in college, but >>is selling a little bit. I think this is anyone who is selling a program now, >>although if you did the "Young Talents" thing a couple of years ago and are no >>longer getting money you are probably not professional anymore. These are >>people who if they were charged the professional rate for tournament entry fees, >>would end up spending everything they made and probably more. >> >>Amateurs are people who aren't selling their programs. Right. My definitions: amateur: A programmer is an amateur if he is not a professional, nor an employd scientist involved with game-theory at any time and has not received money for his game-development in the last 12 months. semi-professional: A programmer is a semi-professional if he is not an amateur nor a professional. professional: A programmer is a professional if during any full year his income from game-development has been bigger than any other part of his income. >>Attempts to set rules based upon percentage of income are bad, because dumb >>things happen. You can have someone who is making a quarter million dollars per >>year from a business or stocks or something, and making fifty thousand on a >>chess program, and they are an amateur, This is unlikely and not a big problem, because they would be semi-pro not amateur. >>and you have someone else who is >>starving to death making fifteen thousand dollars per year on a program, >> nothing on anything else, and they are a professional. They should be considered professional. >>Instead we have to do it based upon level of commercialism. The two extremes >>are easy. The big programs are professional, and those who aren't selling and >>who haven't sold are amateur. The harder ones are people like Vincent, Gerd >>Isenberg, Rudolf Hubner, Gromit, the Goliath guy, and so forth. Some of these >>guys have been sporadically kind of professional but they shouldn't end up >>paying four times as much on entry fees for the rest of their lives if they stop >>selling. I took care of that and Bob: The semi-pro can turn amateur again if nothing was earned in the last 12 months. This is not possible for pro's. Game-theory scientist cannot be considered amateur. >>bruce > >Here is my suggestion for a solution to the problem, that I made a long time >ago: > >If you enter your program in the tournament, you can pay a minimal (or no) >entry fee, but you can not use _any_ results in the tournament as part of a >marketing strategy. You can't use the same name for your program in the event >as you would use if you sold it. IE you can not derive _any_ commercial >benefit from the event. Wake-up: They can use it and they will use it to their maximum benefit. There is nothing you can do about that. Theo >This lets "me" in for a cheap fee,... Check.
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.