Author: Albert Silver
Date: 07:46:00 05/09/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 09, 2000 at 04:46:42, Alberto Rezza wrote:
>There are examples of open championships in many sports and games, with the
>title going to the best placed player with qualification - though the
>"strangers" are usually other humans, not machines :)
>
>>Saying the title would go to
>>the first human player in the list would still be unacceptable BTW. The closed
>>national championship is only for those who are candidates to the title.
>
>So, an open championship is unacceptable because a closed chapionship is indeed
>closed?
>
>Where's the logic?
Where did I say anything about an open championship being unacceptable? Not that
it matters as what I said was that I don't think Fritz's participation would be
ok even if it couldn't compete for the title. In other words even if the rules
dictated that if Fritz came first and Piket (for example) came second, Piket
would get the title, I would still veto the program's participation. I know that
the reasons against the program's participation vary, but mine is simply one
based on what the purpose of a national championship is, and as such, I do not
see Fritz's participation as acceptable. The National Brazilian championship for
example is more than simply a tournament, and simple evidence is that Kasparov
for all his chess might couldn't possibly win it this year. He wouldn't be
allowed to participate. Uri asked whether organizing an identical tournament
with the very same players in which one would be for the Dutch title and the
other would be the Fritz tournament would be acceptable. I think he thought this
was sarcasm, but the answer is yes, that would be just fine.
Albert Silver
>
>Alberto
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.