Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:14:56 12/31/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 31, 2002 at 15:56:58, Russell Reagan wrote: >On December 31, 2002 at 13:21:04, Uri Blass wrote: > >>I do not believe that they have less talent than some amateurs that the >>interface is no hard work for them. > >That doesn't matter. Of course they could easily do it, but there is _zero_ >reason for them to do that. I suspect that most of the commercial engine authors >would be of the attitude that their participation at an event gives it more >credibility (and they would be right). There has to be some kind of compensation >for them to do the extra work, and there isn't. > >Think of it in another area of life. If you wanted a professional athlete or >famous author to come speak at a gathering, how many would do it for free? It >would be easy for the professional athlete to pay for his own travel expenses >(just like it would be easy for the commercial authors to write winboard code) >since he has millions of dollars (and the commercial authors have great >programming skill), but no professional athlete is going to pay his own way to >come do you a favor (just like no commercial programmer is going to waste his >time writing winboard code to participate in a weak tournament with no prize). In this case even without the condition that the proffesional athlete is going to pay I expect no professional participation so the excuse that the reason is the fact that the professional had to pay is not convincing. I also do not see the participation of the commercial programs as a favour that other programmers need. I do not see a reason that we need them. If they do not want to participate they do not have to do it. There are more important tournaments(for example the ssdf) and I see no reason to care about the CCT5 Uri
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.