Author: Marc Plum
Date: 19:21:43 03/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 12, 2000 at 20:46:53, Roger wrote: >This is forum in which people expect logical argumentation, backed up by >evidence, where such evidence exists. (rest snipped) And yet, you have offered neither. I'll try one more time, on the assumption that you are honestly missing the point. You assume that a victory by Deep Junior would prove an honest match, and that a victory by Xie Jun would create a strong presumption of a dishonest one. This has no basis in fact. Deep Junior may well be the stronger player, or not. That is what this match is intended to establish. Personally, I think that DJ has an excellent chance to win, but I'm willing to be proven wrong. You assume that the cheating could only be on one side. Nonsense. Why should either side be free from suspicion? If Deep Junior wins all the remaining games, why shouldn't you demand proof that it didn't receive help? If you are going to be fair minded about this, the best thing to do is not to bring up the subject of cheating at all until you have hard evidence. The second best is to suspect both sides equally, and demand match conditions that make it impossible for either side to cheat. If the match does not turn out the way you think it should, couldn't it be that you are simply mistaken about which player is the better? Is your knowledge of chess and chess-players really so great that you already KNOW this without the formality of a match? You seem to think that if the evidence contradicts your preconceptions, then the evidence must be faked. If this doesn't make things clear, there is nothing more I can do. I'll be watching this match with interest, hoping to find out which player is better, and ready to accept either result. By all means take the last word if you like, but try to open your mind just a little. Marc
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.