Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 23:12:03 03/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
URL for The Week In Chess from Mark Crowther: http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/twic.html The letter from Xie Jun certainly places the events in a different light. The least thing they could have done is have an independent arbiter at both sides, at Deep Juniors' end too, in my opinion. That just for starters, I'm not even talking about not paying any starting fee, not consulting about ending the match, one-sided accusations on KC's webpage about bad sportsmansip, with no chance for Xie or the independent observer Mr Leong who apparently felt insulted too and who did write a report, too reply too all this, etc. The text in TWIC 280: Open letter from Xie Jun Shanghai, 17th March 2000 When I read Michael Adams' open letter in The Week in Chess, some weeks ago, it was hard for me to envisage that I myself would be the next person with a bad experience in a match against Deep Junior. The ClubKasparov (CK) report is most unfair and I am quite shocked about the many ugly words. I can barely believe that this report reflects the same match as the one I played. Never before has my behaviour been criticised like this. As the reigning Women's World Champion, and also for myself as an honest person, I very much like to give my version of the story. Let us start at the beginning. The match report mentions that it was unclear whether the match would go ahead, until the last minute, and the blame is put on 'money transfer disagreements'. This is simply not true and it should read that CK did not pay me as agreed, more commonly known as 'breach of contract'. Some time before the match I sent a signed contract to CK. On it, I wrote that I would agree to all, provided that I would receive part of the starting fee in my bank account, thirty days prior to the start. One week before the starting date, however, I had still not received anything. I made it clear to CK that I would not play unless I would be paid as agreed. Several days before the first match game I arrived in Shanghai and Mr. Ignatius Leong - appointed by CK to act as the official observer - handed over a fax from CK. This fax had the signatures of both Eyal Gutman and Torn Walker, in the role of CEO of Kasparovchess online Inc. So this was the supposed prove of money transfer. Yet, I had asked specifically for some sort of bank statement and now all I got was an internal CK document on office paper. Later I was given more assurances but I had already lost my interest in listening. From that moment onwards, all communication went via Mr. Leong. On the day of the first game I had still not received any money and I had to make a serious choice. In the end, I decided to play only when I saw the announcement on CK's web site and I realised that I would disappoint many people by not playing. In addition, the match was already announced in many places in the Chinese media. So let it be clear that I agreed to play in the situation where the contract was already breached by CK. Now we move to the games. For game one, I arrived at 13:15 GMT (21:15 local time) in the playing room. The game did not start on time and during the game, there were many problems with the connection. It is difficult for me to understand why immediately the blame was put on me. In the contract it was stated explicitly that CK would organise the match and that I "will be located in China and will receive technical support from CK (hard- and software) if needed, a CK web site reporter will be present where Xie Jun actually plays Deep Junior". In my view, this meant that I needed to be present and only concentrate on playing the game, and that I was not in charge of possible technical problems, caused in China or Israel. Because of these connection problems, the game could not continue and a proposal was made to reschedule the game. I did not agree. Firstly, it is not my responsibility when the technique is not in place. Moreover, I had agreed to a match of six games (and one play-off game, if needed) and not seven. I am sure that I would have co-operated (and agreed to a seventh game) had it not been for the fact that both Mr. Leong (the independent observer) and myself felt repeatedly insulted by the aggressive tone of CK's communication, implying that we were the originators of the technical problems. This attitude, together with the aforementioned financial 'disagreement' made me refuse to add a seventh game to the match at this stage. For the second game I arrived, like the first time, 15 minutes prior to the start of the game in the playing hall (21:15 local time). Unfortunately, the problems had not been solved. It took more than an hour before the game got going and both sides agreed to shorten the total playing time from 6 to 5 hours. This had been at my request because I did not want to last the game over night. It is also obvious that I could not agree to play by telephone: the contract stated very clearly that "all games will be played through the Internet". Moreover, if I do not see the moves on the screen, how could I tell whom I am playing? It might well be another grandmaster. Finally, the game got started at about 23:00 local time, still with numerous problems, and after some time I ended up in a position with bishop and five pawns against knight and two pawns. Having played for about ten moves in this elementary position, I asked via Mr. Leong if Deep Junior knew how to resign. This question seemed perfectly legitimate to me. It was the first time that I played this computer program and it does not take a grandmaster to win a basic endgame position three pawns up. I was simply wondering whether the programmers would step in - and show a little respect for their opponent - or whether we would go on until mate. The game finished at 1:30 AM local time. Similar problems occurred in game three. I had to wait for more than two and half-hours before we could start and only a few minutes before midnight the CK/Deep Junior team fixed the problem. After all this waiting, I did what everybody else would do in the situation, i.e. ask for time compensation. However, the Deep Junior team refused and during the time of fixing the technical problems, there had been a row on the phone between Mr. Leong and our contacts on the other side. I gathered that Mr. Leong was talking to Shay and Aviv Bushinsky, but I was left out of the discussion as Mr. Leong did not want me to get more annoyed than I was. I sat in the middle of the room and waited. Finally, the game was changed to a four-hours time control. I lost the game in the middle of the night. The next day was the first time that I read a report about the match on CK web site and I felt deeply insulted. The report was one-sided, incorrect and there was no trace of Mr. Leong's report - the independent observer in Shanghai. Game four started on the same day as the closing ceremony of the SUFE cup (the Shanghai tournament) and there was a party next to the playing hall. I arrived on time and, luckily enough, the game started on time. After making my first move (21:42 local time) I saw that there were problems on the other side. Deep Junior disconnected at 21:44, at 21:49, at 21:54, at 21:59 and at 22:12. Then I noticed something strange on the screen: Deep Junior's time rolled backwards (!) while I was losing time. Of course, I refused to continue in this chaos. After some telephone discussion it was agreed by the Deep Junior team to reset my time to 2 hours and Deep Junior's time to 1:40. I was quite happy for the game to continue when, all of the sudden, the next thing happened. In a standard Sicilian position, Deep Junior made the original move ...Kd8 (and not ...Qd8, as in the CK report). Naturally, I realised that the person in charge with the mouse had made the error of letting the king slip while castling. I replied a4 without any thought and waited for an explanation or a request for take-back from the Deep Junior team. The reason I made my move fast is that I did not want any of the discussions to take place in my own thinking time. To my surprise, nothing happened for 25 minutes and then Deep Junior (or someone else?) played ...Ke8. I felt quite embarrassed by it all. There I sat, trying to play a serious game against an opponent who had played ...Kd8, Ke8, Kf8, h5 and Rh7 - even though this may have been the best defence under the circumstances. In the meantime, more and more chess players arrived from the party to watch the game and there was a television crew from CCTV, the largest TV station in China, zooming in ... on this remarkable position - probably to the amusement of millions of chess connoisseurs in China. I cannot remember exactly at what time I played 16.Qe2, but Mr. Leong's phone rang and he brought the news that the Deep Junior team thought that the Shanghai connection was lost. All spectators and myself were surprised because on the screen we could still see that Deep Junior's clock was ticking - not the picture you expect to see when logged out. Mr. Leong explained on the phone what we saw and told the CK contact that there was a television crew present. He asked the crew to zoom in on the position. Next, the well-known French organiser Jean-Paul Touze arrived on the scene (from the next-door disco) and he explained once more what we witnessed on the screen. Yet, the Bushinsky brothers were not convinced and asked me to leave the Internet and log-in again. I agreed to do this, but under the condition that the time for technical problems would be deduced from the Deep Junior clock, because the technical problem had been with the Deep Junior connection, as far as we could judge. It had already happened a few times and the game could last forever, if no time were deduced at all. The Deep Junior team refused. In the end, I heard from Mr. Leong that the Deep Junior team called off the match and that they cancelled the remaining games. I asked Mr. Leong to phone back to have this message in writing, because I did not want to be accused some days later or forfeiting games five and six. However, nobody answered the phone and Mr. Leong listened to an answering machine. Consequently, Mr. Leong let me wait until 00:05 local time when Deep Junior ran out of time. I was then declared by Mr. Leong (CK's official independent observer) as the winner of game four. Allow me to make a few additional remarks. Nobody forces CK or the Deep Junior team to organise matches through the Internet. When the technique is not ready, these matches should simply not take place. If CK or the Deep Junior team decides to embark on these matches anyway, there has to be somebody from CK present with full responsibility for the technical aspect. Without any form of regulation, the above mentioned problems will remain. It would also be an improvement to have a real independent arbiter. Lastly, never in my life have I been accused of bad sportsmanship and I cannot remember that Michael Adams ever had problems. In any normal situation, I expect organisers to treat chess players like Michael Adams and myself, reigning Women's World Champion, with at least some basic form of respect. In an experimental Internet situation, where many things still need sorting out, all parties involved need to be flexible. This was apparently not the case here. I leave it up to the reader to draw conclusions. If needed, I have no problem whatsoever in handing over documents, game sheets (complete or incomplete) or other material to prove my story - to an independent person, that is. In my opinion, the CK news Team and the Deep Junior team owe me an apology for breach of contract, insulting behaviour and leaving out crucial data in the final match report. Let us hope for better days indeed.
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.