Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: We will only KNOW the games are fair if she loses.

Author: Mogens Larsen

Date: 18:22:55 03/12/00

Go up one level in this thread


On March 12, 2000 at 20:54:18, Roger wrote:

>I don't think you get it yet. ;)
>
>If Xie and her handlers had brought an exact duplicate of Amir's machine into
>the tournament, their intention to cheat would have been clear, since they would
>simply choose the right opening to reproduce whole games move for move.

That would require them to reproduce every possible opening by Deep Junior. Deep
Junior don't choose from all possible openings, but the task would be enormous
nonetheless.

>Accordingly, for the result to be ambiguous, there must be some subtle
>differences between the machine they actually brought into the tournament and
>Amirs. That gives them exactly the wiggle room they need to perpetuate a facade
>of fairness, what you call "the potential difference between moves."

What you call wiggle room can be the equivalent of a loosing game due to a bad
choice of move. Amir might even want to test new code in playing conditions.

>That is why I say Xie should lose this match, because only if she loses will we
>KNOW that the match is real.

Strengthwise there's nothing that speaks against a potential win for Xie Jun,
nor a defeat. If we knew that DJ was stronger the argument would be valid, but
we don't.

Best wishes...
Mogens



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.