Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 15:23:48 09/09/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 09, 1999 at 13:46:54, Dann Corbit wrote: >On September 09, 1999 at 12:12:29, Fernando Villegas wrote: >>On September 08, 1999 at 18:08:56, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>On September 08, 1999 at 17:36:38, José de Jesús García Ruvalcaba wrote: >>> >>>>Should the game Rebel-Hoffman be taken in account to calculate the performance >>>>rating of Rebel in the GM challenge? >>>> >>>>-Yes 1 >>>>-No >>>>-Abstain >>> >>>Why such an absurd position as to claim it should count despite machine crashes? >>> >>>Because it does not matter *why* the outcome was as it was. >>> >> >>The policy of "what it was it was" is sensible if a real tournament is being >>performed, but this is not the case. There is not a trophee, nothing in dispute. >>The entire idea is to see if a program obviusly running in normal conditions can >>match the wit of a GM. The result, them, would be also unaccountable if the GM >>fall victim of a heart stroke. I am sure in that case Ed would not ask the >>victory because the GM did not comply with the time limit. >Equipment failure is just one more real reason that a computer may lose to a >human player. If you discount this variable you damage the experiment. I have >the evil heart of a machine in such cases. My eye will show no pity. > Well, maybe some confusion arises from the words and concepts we use. I understand that what ed is testing is not an artificial entity constituted by a computer and a program, but just a program. At least I understand that way because I want to know how good is rebel as such, no how smoothly runs rebel with this or that hardware. >>>If a GM defaults because he does not feel well enough to continue, does that >>>invalidate the loss? No. And neither should this one. >> >>See reasons above. Tournament are like races and everything counts, of course, >>but Ed challenge is not a tournament.Is more an experiment. You does not >>validate an experiment if you know that the condtions were not fulfilled. >If there was a precondition that the match would be invalid in the case of >machine failure (Or perhaps GM indigestion) then I would accept this position. > >> Perhaps Ed should clarify this issue. >No cries of "mess-up... do-over" should be allowed. >> >>Who is doing such thing? >Those who say that the result is not valid. I did not. I do not care about the validity of the game in order to determinate a winner, but as a tool for know rebel century before purchasing it. And of course in that perspective a fault game due to ardware prolems does not give me much information...at least that failure happens with every computer and so i can deduce is a faulty program. Cheers Fernando Regards Fernando
This page took 0.01 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.