Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:30:21 11/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 21, 2003 at 05:59:05, Amir Ban wrote: >On November 20, 2003 at 23:23:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 20, 2003 at 14:23:10, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On November 20, 2003 at 08:59:25, Matthew Hull wrote: >>> >>>>On November 20, 2003 at 06:57:30, Amir Ban wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 18:12:12, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 17:30:36, Amir Ban wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 12:02:56, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:51:59, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:34:17, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:30:37, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:06:21, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:55:26, martin fierz wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:31:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>here. Makes a _lot_ of sense. And it shows just how "world" aware the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>ICCA actually is. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>i don't really want to be involved in this thread, but i can't resist this >>>>>>>>>>>>>one... >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>disclaimer: of course it would be much more sensible to have the championship in >>>>>>>>>>>>>the US from time to time. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>cheapo: so the ICCA does something which is not good for *one* country >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>That's one cheapo that doesn't work. It would be like 2000 years ago holding >>>>>>>>>>>>gladiator events that discommode only one country, Rome. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>MH >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>of course it works, and you just invite the next follow up cheapo ;-) >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>2000 years ago the romans were perhaps not aware that there was much more to the >>>>>>>>>>>world than rome. sometimes one gets the feeling that the US citizens are no >>>>>>>>>>>different in this respect... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Ok, how about holding a world chess championship that only inconviences >>>>>>>>>>Russians. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I think you get the idea. :) >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>MH >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>of course i get the idea! i put a disclaimer on my first post stating clearly >>>>>>>>>that IMO the championship should be held in the US from time to time, and i >>>>>>>>>labelled my posts as cheapos :-) >>>>>>>>>i thought that made it clear enough... >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>going back to your comparison with the russians: exactly how many american >>>>>>>>>programs are in the top 10 of the SSDF list? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The SSDF list only uses consumer-grade technology to test programs. Programs >>>>>>>>tuned to that limited technology will always top that list. That is why the >>>>>>>>list is of limited importance. A real WCCC is going to attract high performance >>>>>>>>projects, not just consumer oriented projects. This is what the New World has >>>>>>>>always offered. But, Old Worlders have a problem with that I guess. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Do any such New World high performance projects exist ? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Crafty can be such a project on practically a moment's notice (I believe). >>>>>>Other programs are similiarly suited. If the WCCC comes to North America, the >>>>>>projects will materialize. This was the benefit of limiting the event to every >>>>>>three years and making it a practical event, length-wise. It provided time for >>>>>>the husbanding of resources, planning, development and sponsorship along with a >>>>>>relative rarity that made the event that much more important and compelling (and >>>>>>thus an easier sell to the people with the expensive resources). >>>>>> >>>>>>The current cycle with it's awkward timing and extended length, along with it's >>>>>>persistent location in Europe (not to mention its archaic modus operendi) seems >>>>>>calculated to favor European commercial interests while excluding projects from >>>>>>North America. >>>>>> >>>>>>Perhaps it is the punishment Europeans are determined to mete out to us for the >>>>>>DB2 triumph, which seems to be universally reviled overseas. EU types are maybe >>>>>>fed up with the dominance of North American, high-end computer chess projects. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>>There's nothing to be fed up with, since the dominance is long gone. >>>> >>>>Yes, the ICGA have seen to that by keeping the WCCC out of North America and >>>>making inconvenient for North Americans to participate. Nicely done, IMO. >>>> >>>>>Hong Kong >>>>>1995 was the swansong. There were 4 of them there, but losing to Fritz, and even >>>>>before that, in 1992, to Schroeder, underscored that they have lost their >>>>>advantage and so their reason in life. >>>> >>>> >>>>That is a not entirely unreasonable opinion, though still incorrect, IMO. Bob >>>>addressed the competitive issue in another thread here. There are American >>>>programs suited to high performance hardware which would have a definite >>>>advantage, even over your project. Yes? >>>> >>> >>>Sure. There are tens if not hundreds of Americans who would make me look silly >>>with multi-million $ projects and $10 million hardware. The only thing holding >>>them back is that they can't afford to go to Europe. >>> >>>It has been tested once in a Rebel vs. Crafty match where Crafty was given a 100 >>>to 1 time advantage. The match was aborted after Rebel won the first game. >>> >> >>How about doing a couple of things: >> >>(1) tell the entire story. (a) one game doesn't mean _anything_. (b) Ed >>played multiple games with crafty and rebel having a _very_ long time for >>each move. Crafty won. Does that prove anything? Nope, other than the >>one handicap game was meaningless. >> >>(2) I'll be _happy_ to take you on at 100:1 time odds, anything you think >>you are ready. I'll even put up a wager to make it interesting. I am >>talking about a match of at least 10 games. Interested? You'd be >>stupid if you were. Because I wouldn't play _any_ program at that time >>handicap, including the original Sargon... >> > >You're on. Please suggest format and let's discuss after WCCC. > >Amir > Any format is fine by me. 100 minutes to 1. 6000 minutes to 60. Totally irrelevant to me. I don't have to guess on the outcome here. I don't believe your program is _that_ much more knowledgable than mine. It is certainly better tactically. But 100:1 is going to eliminate that tactical advantage totally and swing it the other way.. You had better have a _bunch_ of chess knowledge I don't have to beat me. I don't believe _any_ program has that big an advantage today... > >> >>> >>>>But that's not good for business, ist it? It looks to me that the status quo >>>>favors your interests. >>>> >>> >>>So it's the money motive working here ? This would be an object lesson on how to >>>bring industry giants and ivy-league colleges to their knees: make them travel, >>>or make them get a $50,000 sponsor. >>> >>>Amir >>> >> >>It is _several_ things. The biggest is that we have an organization >>that was formed with the sole purpose of fostering interest in computer >>chess "around the world". It is no longer living up to that charter. >>It is now fostering computer chess interest in Europe, mainly. Which >>is fine. I've already re-named it to the ECCI or ECGA, which is much >>more descriptive... >> >>It is easily possible to get a company to provide hardware, and some >>publicity money, and even some prize money. But not a big chunk of >>change that goes into a black hole called the JICGA, which won't >>benefit the donor whatsoever... >> >>If you tax someone too much, they move away. >> >> >>> >>>>Matt >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>To remind you, the current world champion is not European. >>>>> >>>>>Amir
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.