Author: Albert Silver
Date: 05:42:56 01/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2000 at 08:19:17, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>On January 26, 2000 at 08:08:47, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On January 26, 2000 at 07:17:05, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>
>>>About being "World champion, the rest is details", it's a classic case of
>>>hypostatization, which is "to attribute real identity to a concept."
>>>
>>>1. We create a Swiss tournament of 11 rounds and name it World Championship.
>>>2. Program X wins the tournament and becomes World Champion.
>>>3. We are to believe that program X is the best because it is the World Champion
>>>and the rest is details.
>>>
>>>If this 11 round tournament would have given another name, for instance ICCA
>>>championship, steps 2 and 3 wouldn't cross anybody's mind.
>>>
>>>With this I don't intend to attack Shredder 4, Junior 4.6 or Fritz 3, all fine
>>>programs and none of them the best, but to question the meaning of a name.
>>>
>>>No human would become world champion after playing a total of 11 games in his
>>>life, and I don't think programs should either.
>>
>>Not that I disagree with your arguments, but if one does create a championship
>>in which all participants are in agreement with (why participate if not?), then
>>I don't think you can discredit the winner
Sorry. I didn't mean 'you' as in you, Enrique, but as in a generic 'you' such as
"One cannot discredit the winner...". I completely agree that the WC should be
the best in the world, otherwise the title has little meaning, but I didn't
agree with Jouni's discrediting Shredder's victory out of luck. It sounded very
much as if this complaint would not exist were it a program he approved of.
Truly the WCCC format must be rethought though.
Albert Silver
>
>I don't have the slightest intention of "discrediting the winner". My point was
>another one and I made it before the ICCA championship: "world champion" means,
>to many, the best there is; an 11 round Swiss tournament is not the right way to
>determine which program is the best.
>
>> with complaints about luck just
>>because you don't like the outcome.
>
>It is not a matter of likes and dislikes, but of forced believes, namely that a
>a chess player, human or program, must be considered World Champion after
>winning only one tournament of 11 rounds. It has never been acceptable in human
>chess and I fail to see why it should be any different in computer chess.
>
>Enrique
>
>> Why not just do away with the championship
>>and declare whomever one likes as WC? Everyone had their shot, and luck or not,
>>Shredder won. One may disagree that Shredder is the undisputed strongest program
>>available, but not that it is the WC.
>>
>> Albert Silver
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.