Author: Richard Heldmann
Date: 18:17:32 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2001 at 20:59:19, Christophe Theron wrote: >On April 15, 2001 at 14:46:49, Richard Heldmann wrote: > >>All competitions can be rejected as too short, when the 'favorite' or your >>favorite or my favorite doesn't win. In sports, the better player or team does >>not always win the championship trophy. This happens in all the time. Shredder >>is the current World Champion. Shredder earned the right to play Kramnick. >>Where is the fallacy in this logic? >> >>I own both RTII and S5. I prefer Gambit Tiger 2.0. I was *very* disappointed >>when Tiger did not play in the World Championship. > > > >But Tiger played! > >Or am I missing something? > > > > Christophe Oops. My apologies!! I was referring to the tournament in Paderborn, not London. http://www.uni-paderborn.de/~IPCCC/ This playoff idea has really opened up a can of worms and as Ed has said, "It smells." I think so too. I do not think there should be a playoff. I sympathize with those programmers whose programs may be excluded. How can *anyone* decide who plays and who does not, and also the method of deciding the winner? I am not making any personal negative comments about the parties involved, I am sure their intentions are good. I think the idea of a playoff should be dropped. I like the idea of a crap-shoot tournament where the programmers are directly involved and no hanky-panky can occur under their watchful eyes. Now just how does Stefan do it? ;) To suggest SSDF list is a fairer method, discounts the imperfect methods used, i.e. games between different speed machines and impartial operators. As much as they may protest, I've never met an impartial referee. Richard Heldmann
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.