Author: Hans Gerber
Date: 11:41:39 05/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2000 at 15:59:02, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >On May 08, 2000 at 15:54:14, Jürgen Hartmann wrote: > >>>than 1%. I know of no other sport in which this is the case. Chess has to be >>>flexible in finding sponsors, or it must be willing to return to the old >>>backroom days when prize funds were miniscule and the greatest players on the >>>planet normally died in abject poverty. >> >>You totally misunderstand organized chess players. You have probably never been >>to a chess club yourself. Most organized chess players are completely >>disinterested in publicity, sponsoring, public recognization etc. >> >>Jürgen > >If you are organized and professional meaning makeing your living with computer >chess you have to be interested in those kind of things as this means more >income for you. > >Stefan Agreed, but you should be interested in the nature (dignity etc.) of human chessplayers too. Take Bosboom. He simply doesn't accept that a machine can take part in a national championship. Now look what he did if the informations are correct. He played a few moves and proposed a draw. He spoke to the human being on the other side, the programmer, the father of the program. Interpretation: he wanted to be friendly to the programmer but he didn't want to play the machine. Now, your collegue showed little respect for the conflict of the chessplayer. You see, friendly relations seem impossible if machines are in the center of interest. Let me ask you if you really believe that a won point is worth always the same no matter how it is won? I don't think so. Why not accepting the draw? This is common practice in tournament chess. (see also the game SHREDDER vs Karpov...)
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.