Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:35:56 02/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2000 at 11:32:35, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On February 17, 2000 at 11:18:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On February 17, 2000 at 11:02:40, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >> >>>On February 17, 2000 at 10:39:28, Mig wrote: >>> >>>>Hello Everyone, >>>> >>>>This is Mig Greengard, also of KasparovChess.com and, by the way, the mystery VP >>>>mentioned by my good friend, basketball star Shay Bushinsky. I thought I would >>>>add some comments and clarifications to what was unquestionably a total disaster >>>>and also a very emotional situation for Shay and Amir, as well as Mickey Adams. >>>> >>>>We've all been through about four hours of non-stop phone calls around the world >>>>regarding this episode tonight. [Now last night, I wrote this late last night >>>>but didn't want to post till I heard from Amir and/or Shay.] It was a lose-lose >>>>situation for all concerned and Shay and Amir lost worse than the rest. >>>> >>>>Before I go on it's VERY important to me to say that GM Adams behaved at all >>>>times in a very sportsmanlike manner and in no way insisted on anything >>>>unreasonable at any time. I don't really expect the audience here to see things >>>>from a human player's point of view (!), but I do wish to stress that he was >>>>accomodating until things just got out of hand at a very late hour. >>>> >>>>Criticism, and there is plenty to go around, should be centered on >>>>KasparovChess.com and our lack of proper documentation for the players. When >>>>things broke down we had no real rule book to refer the players to, no list of >>>>contingency plans or time limits for how long a communications breakdown should >>>>be to be considered a forfeit, etc. So instead of simply referring to a rulebook >>>>we had a nightmare of phonecalls and recrimination. As embarrassing as this poor >>>>preparation is for me and all of us, I prefer it to seeing GM Adams undeservedly >>>>criticized or rumors of conspiracy floated. >>>> >>>>As for human players, most of them are going to blame, and not necessarily >>>>incorrectly, ANY AND ALL technology-related delays on us. That's because as >>>>organizers we have an obligation to make sure things are working for each >>>>player. If it's not, the levels of stress involved are not conducive to decent >>>>chess, in a human. If both players had been human I believe everyone would have >>>>had a different attitude. Discrimination against the machine? Probably, but as >>>>it gets later and later, as nerves and five hours of tension build, a human is >>>>at a severe disadvantage against a computer. Plus, it was Junior's connection >>>>that went down. Adams, due to his ongoing match against Seirawan, was unable to >>>>change dates without breaking his commitment to the organizers and sponsor >>>>there, so really had no choice. Starting the second game at 7 p.m. with no >>>>guarantee that there would be no further problems was not a serious option. >>>>Eventually a deadline had to be set, he could not be expected to sit there >>>>through dinner time on the edge of his seat waiting for the call to start play. >>>> >>>>I don't want to air KC's dirty laundry in public as such, but actually I think >>>>this forum could be a good one to get more ideas about how to solve such things >>>>in the future and I hope Shay and Amir won't mind my butting in here on their >>>>home turf. Plus, I agree with just about everything Shay says, I just want to >>>>provide the full picture. More below. >>>> >>>>On February 16, 2000 at 19:38:09, Shay Bushinsky wrote: >>>> >>>>>Dear people, >>>>> >>>>>At this moment, I regret to say that my own company has decided to >>>>>discriminate our Deep Junior project and to declare >>>>>Michael Adams at his insistence to be the victor of our match. >>>>> >>>>>This arbitrary decision was taken in spite of the ruling of the tournament >>>>>official referee, Mr. Boris Postovisky, and was explained as the product >>>>>of the inconvenience caused to Adams as a result of the delay incurred by >>>>>our ISP slow connection which obviously was beyond our control. >>>> >>>>I really disagree with crediting Adams for insisting on anything. He was more >>>>than willing to play the second game (and continue the first, he was not the one >>>>who was cut off) until the delay ran into the evening. Unlike some of the >>>>prima-donna GMs out there I found him very accomodating over the course of our >>>>four phone conversations tonight. At the end he was simply hungry and tired and >>>>wasn't going to play, and basically didn't understand that if his opponent >>>>couldn't show up for two hours why he wasn't then forfeited. >>>> >>>>I should also add that due to the late hour in Russia IA Postovsky was not >>>>present or observing the match in question and that due to his lack of Russian >>>>Adams was unable to present his side of the situation. But of course playing the >>>>game is always the best solution and if Adams wouldn't have been at such a large >>>>disadvantage by the time things were ready, it should have been played. >>>> >>>>>In previous circumstances, when for instance Grandmaster Milos has disconnected >>>>>for over 20 minutes during his game with Morozevich no forfeit was declared >>>>>and the match was resumed. >>>>> >>>>>All above despite the fact that Mr. Adams himself had trouble connecting >>>>>and the match was delayed for over 90 minutes mainly because of his >>>>>computers not being able to connect. >>>> >>>>True, but the bottom line is that unless we consider them intentional delays, KC >>>>as organizer has a responsibility to avoid these technical problems. I was in >>>>Bermuda for his first match and all went well, and I take responsibility for not >>>>leaving things in sufficient order for them to avoid problems in the second >>>>round. We tested everything with that same computer and had no problems at all. >>>>That's technology. And when both players are human, both are getting tired and >>>>nervous; no advantage is being gained by a long delay. >>>> >>>>>This is a very low point in our career as developers of Deep Junior >>>>>and we apologize to all our fans and to the spectators who expected us to >>>>>play a decent match. >>>> >>>>Hey, Junior played a great match and everyone here knows it. And very few people >>>>wanted to see you play Garry more than me. It would have been great to see and >>>>incredibly great for the site. >>>> >>>>>It is a great embarrassment to the company I work for and to myself especially >>>>>towards Amir Ban my partner and friend who is just an impartial participant in >>>>>this event as any of the other players. >>>>> >>>>>Mr. Adams who initially agreed to our draw offer in the adjourned game (lost >>>>>position for him) and was willing to continue and play a second game >>>>>until he changed his mind and said that after speaking to a VP of our company >>>>>was led to understand that he can claim a forfeit. >>>> >>>>Adams did accept the draw offer in the first game, and it will be recorded as a >>>>draw. (He was of course completely lost, although Junior was exhibiting strange >>>>time management as Amir mentions in his post.) The forfeit was the second game, >>>>in which a delay of several hours took place. Adams never said he would continue >>>>to wait all night and play whenever Junior was ready. He said he would play and >>>>waited. By the time of the final phone call, and Carol Jarecki recorded the >>>>clock times of the delays and many phone calls, it was almost two hours after >>>>the first game was interrupted and he had just about had it. After four or five >>>>rounds of calls by me to Shay in Israel and Adams in Bermuda, he said that he >>>>wasn't going to play at all unless it could happen before 7pm (maybe it was 6pm, >>>>I don't remember if we were talking NY time or Bermuda time). So I talked to >>>>Shay again and asked how long it would take to get Junior back on the net and as >>>>always he was honest and said he wasn't sure, that it could take 35 minutes to >>>>get the modem installed, etc. He was the first to mention the word "forfeit" as >>>>the potential consequence of the excessive delay. So when I talked to Mickey >>>>again I said that in my opinion, if they couldn't get online before the hour it >>>>would probably be considered a forfeit. No, I'm not an arbiter, but common sense >>>>said that we couldn't expect him to sit there with no idea what was going on for >>>>so long. Respect for all the players is very important. Adams in no way pushed >>>>for a forfeit. >>>> >>>>In the end, I think seeing Adams play at that point, until nine at night or >>>>later, and get slaughtered would not have left a very good taste in anyone's >>>>mouth. And that assumes no further technical problems. If Junior's clock had >>>>been ticking the entire time it would have lost game two on time. Of course it >>>>wasn't Junior's fault, it worked great as Adams (and Illescas) found out. Amir >>>>and Shay are clearly victims here, but no sword proved sharp enough to cut the >>>>Gordian knot presented us. >>>> >>>>To sum up, please reserve your accusations and criticism for me and the rest of >>>>the KC staff that never found the time to put together a comprehensive rulebook >>>>that would have avoided the worst of this situation. The rulebook would have >>>>something similar to "If one player disconnects for whatever reason and is >>>>unable to resume play for XX minutes, that player will forfeit that game." >>>>(Adjourning to another day would potentially be incredibly unfair depending on >>>>the situation on the board and/or clock. Playing the next day was impossible in >>>>this case regardless.) So Junior would most likely have been forfeited under the >>>>rules. >>> >>>Adams would have been forfeited under the rules due to his inability to connect >>>for over one hour in game 1. The fact that Junior had to forfeit and not Adams >>>is incredibly unfair. >> >> >>>This is done and beyond repair. As some sort of compensation, and in the name of >>>fairness and general interest, how about Junior playing a 2 game match against >>>the winner of Kasparov's Grand Prix? >> >>I bet for an additional 100k$ that is no problem > >It shouldn't be a major problem and I can't think of a better way out of this >mess. Let's wait for what KC and Mig have to say. >Enrique With near to 100% sureness we all know Kasparov is not gonna play that match for free. >>>Enrique >>> >>>> But it is to our great shame that no such rule exists and that it took >>>>something as horrible as this to get it done. >>>> >>>>Suggestions about what this rulebook should contain are welcome. Professional >>>>chess does have a future on the internet, but we have a ways to go and a lot to >>>>learn. >>>> >>>>Saludos, Mig >>>> >>>>VP Content & Editor-in-chief >>>>KasparovChess.com >>>>mig@kasparovchess.com
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.