Author: Chessfun
Date: 00:00:24 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2001 at 02:00:45, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 15, 2001 at 20:59:59, Chessfun wrote: > >>I would have liked to have read posts on this subject from both Bruce and >>Dr. Hyatt. <snip nasty garbage> >As far as I'm concerned anyone can play against Kramnik, but I resent the fact >that a good opportunity is wasted with the simplest and least ambitious of all >solutions. No matter how nice the print on the invitations were or the view over >the bay. All in all it boils down to a simple autoplay match between two engines >at the moment. Despite the careful selection process (hmm... including DB says >it all IMO) none of the programs can claim to be the strongest computer program >or the best adversary to Kramnik. If that appeals to you, then fine, no problem. >But it's the lowest common denominator. And that is without being paranoid about >hidden agendas. I have no problem with a simple autoplay match, as with more engines it's simply autoplay matches. I have no preference which program plays only my opinion that of the Deep's the commercial Fritz is strongest. >The other possibility would be to arrange a candidate tournament with SMP >capable programs as I've mentioned before. In accordance with the World >Championships of old. It requires planning, time and money to make room for >early notice to the computer chess community and tournament arrangements. All of >which could have been provided with a little effort IMO given the organisation >responsible and the country supposed to host the match (USA). That would also >contribute to the development of computer chess in general to a higher extent >than the sole challenge from the usual suspects. IMO the problem with a candidate tournament with say 10 engines are the limitations of finding the best program, as again IMO a 9 round or so tourney don't really do it. Plus with other results from the SSDF and other tourneys played all over the internet there are only a few programs strong enough. In order to find the best they need to play as many games as possible therefore the fewer participants the better. >That is my opinion and I don't believe that being more ambitious would >jeopardize the match and that it's now or never. In principle it doesn't matter >for Kramnik as long as his preparations remain the same. I prefer the >professional (serious, thorough and with effort) option given the known >alternative. Trying to get all those participants in your candidates tourney to agree to the basic rules would be a lot of work. Millennium themselves have been talking for what? 3 months or so. Sarah.
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.