Author: Albert Silver
Date: 04:48:41 02/06/01
Go up one level in this thread
On February 06, 2001 at 04:01:03, Ed Schröder wrote:
>On February 05, 2001 at 20:41:59, Garry Evans wrote:
>
>>
>> I was surprised when recieving my febuary issue of Chess Life that there was
>>no mention of the Rebel Van Der Weil match. Wasn't this match a Milstone in
>>Computer Chess and Chess in General!! This was not a blitz match, which
>>computers have already been shown to be superior, but a Standard Tournament time
>>control match. When i see matches of this magnitude ignored by the chess media,
>>first thing comes to my mind is that it is human bias against chess computers
>>that we have seen time and time again. Or did Chess life mention the match but I
>>just overlooked it? If so my apologies to chess life.
>
>I am not surprised. With all respect to John he is not a wellknown
>name. And if you don't know about his specialty (killing computers)
>the match was not special at all. It was special here but not to the
>wide public.
>
>Ed
That's no excuse. With a proper presentation of him and the match, that would
have easily been overcome. Public doesn't know who he is? Tell them! They can
read. Hopefully. It really is possible that the editorial panel of Chess Life
did not see this as anything more than a small publicity stunt (notice all the
GM Whatshisname vs. The Whole Entire Rest of the People of the World matches
that have been appearing ever since Kasparov's), but I tend to think they
thought of it as yesterday's news. The Fritz and Junior participations in top
tournaments last year pretty much cleared up whether programs can compete with
top GMs so to hear that yet another GM fell prey is... yesterday's news. No
offense, Ed, it was great idea and match, but I really think that that is how
they would have looked at it. Still, not even a mention also speaks of bias.
Albert
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.