Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 08:38:07 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2001 at 18:29:11, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 15, 2001 at 16:23:00, Fernando Villegas wrote: > >>I understand your point and that of Ed, but if there is a guy capable of giving >>confidence about this qualification tourn is Enrique. He has the better harware >>available, knows everything about books and settings and in case he does not >>know something, I am sure he is ready to receive any sugestion. Of course things >>would be more satisfing with an open event, but if for some reason that is not >>possible, Enrique was and is the best second choice. > >Very few people doubt that Enrique is capable of running a tournament virtually >flawless, but that isn't the relevant question. The important question is: What >purpose should the match serve? > >a) A match between Kramnik and a random opponent decided by arbitrary >conditions. > Well, not that arbitrary after all. Fritz, Junior, Schredder are all of them top programs with plenty of titles to show. Compared with them, even the most promising current engines should still wait to have something to show in tourns. The point is that to produce a really ecumenical tourn you need a disporportionate amount of extra money for each aditional day. Else; it will be not a close room tourn, as has been said. It is made in open air, with plenty of journalist, internet coverage, arbiters, pèople from SSDF, etc. The atmosphere of mistery that has been thrown over the tourn and his proceedings is absoluteky unfair and misleading. But, as yousay, we will see... Regards Fernando >b) A serious match with a proven challenger by virtue of a legitimate >qualification. > >I prefer the b) option by means already explained. The other option is >simplicity personified. > >The event is taking place in October according to the website, which leaves >plenty of time even after deducting the three months of preparation. The >presumption is that the event will take place or isn't already delayed. > >>Else: I do not know of ANy >>tourn, opened or not, that has not produced some kind of controversy. There is >>always room for complains: the hardaware was not THAT fast, the operator was a >>dud, the book was corrupted, the electricity went down, etc. > >That's true. However, noone prevents anyone from reducing the number of possible >complaints by being as thorough as possible. Displaying some degree of openness >and allowing involvement from multiple sources would go a long way in >accomplishing just that. But let's see what happens. > >Mogens.
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.