Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:08:52 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2001 at 19:20:31, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 16, 2001 at 16:24:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 16, 2001 at 14:58:08, Chris Taylor wrote: >> >>>On April 16, 2001 at 14:14:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 16, 2001 at 13:21:21, Chris Taylor wrote: >>>> >>>>>Let the single chip programs play. If confidence is so high that they are not >>>>>good enough, then fine. They are swept aside! But at least they have had their >>>>>chance! Ed has got a good program, so Does Christophe. Not to mention a score >>>>>of other programs, that given the chance to play, will at least be there! To >>>>>exclude them from the start of the race, is strange. Unless of course it has >>>>>all been decided. Hows' that for a selective search? >>>>>If the likes of Rebel Century or The Tigers, fail to qualify, at least you will >>>>>have the "Strongest" to go on and play Kramnik. And the people who say they were >>>>>not strong enough, will be able to say "Told you so" If one of the single chip >>>>>programs does win through, it will be because they had the opportunity >>>>>to take part. >>>>> >>>>>Chris Taylor >>>> >>>> >>>>I totally disagree. There is exactly _one_ program that should be playing >>>>Kramnik. Shredder. Shredder has won all of the recent computer chess >>>>tournaments. It is the current world champion. There is _absolutely_ no >>>>reason to suggest that a playoff for the right to play Kramnik is needed. In >>>>fact, the suggestion is really insulting to SMK and Shredder. If a program >>>>didn't participate in the last WMCCC event, then I conclude that Shredder is >>>>better and the author was afraid to participate and lose. And by doing that, >>>>he gave up the opportunity to take part in this match. >>>> >>>>I don't understand why there is _any_ sort of playoff under discussion, other >>>>than it is politically/marketing related. yes a newer program might be a bit >>>>better than the older Shredder that won the last WMCCC. But the new Shredder >>>>could well be better than that. closed-door back room tournaments are _not_ >>>>the way to handle this. >>>> >>>>The idea is embarassing, to say the least. When we won the 1983 WCCC event, >>>>nobody questioned who should play David Levy that year. The same logic should >>>>apply now, and SMK/Shredder should play, whether he uses a 486/33 or an 8-way >>>>xeon/900. >>>> >>>>Seems that commercial computer chess companies are just as bloodthirsty now as >>>>they were 20 years ago. And have just as few principles now as then. >>> >>>My only concern was the exclusion of certain programs, simply because they limp >>>on one leg? >>> >>>I agree with you, that Shredder is World Champ, and should shoot for Kramnik! >>>Since it appears that this will not happen? Sadly, a tounament will be played, >>>the deed is done. But only for the exclusive few? To all the rest, not even a >>>look in. Strange how Shredder can be let down, as well? >>> >>>Just me 10 penneth >>> >>>Chris Taylor >> >> >>Just goes to show that the world isn't always fair. :( I generally try >>to remember such things, and at some point, the "other side" will need some >>help. But not from me. I can't believe any of this mess is happening. I >>would hope the _authors_ of the programs would do the right thing themselves >>and simply say "my program won't participate, this is a right earned by >>Shredder and it is Shredder or nothing..." > >Of course publicity is very good for the program playing Kramnik: >"it played kramnik so it gotta be good". > >But when Kasparov left FIDE i remember fide organized a match >for the world championship between Timman and Karpov. > >Timman says now: "this was a big joke match, i didn't have >a single chance and that was already clear long before the match >preparations had even started". > >Kramnik would even win blindfolded from a passive program like shredder. >Setting it to more aggressive parameters is not going to help either as >Kramnik has a very positional style, which compared to the computerish >style of Kasparov, is also from psychical viewpoint a big pro for Kramnik. > >Shredder won all its world titles because programs make so easy positional >mistakes either in opening or endgame. > >For the same reason as shredder has won its world titles i win with my >poor 2281 regurarly still from programs. Amazing but true i have a 100% >score in games of 2 hours and less. Do you think that you can beat Crafty convincingly on ICC in a match of 6 games at time control of 120 0 or 80 60 that is more similiar to tournament time control(80 60 means that you have exactly 2 hours for 40 moves)? If you think that you can do it then maybe programmers can offer you money for playing a match against their program. When there is no evidence for the fact that you get 100% against programs at 2 hours or slower time control programmers have nothing to earn from a match against you even if they win the match because everybody expect them to win. If you beat Crafty (4.5-1.5 is enough and you do not need 6-0) at tournament time control then programmers may have something to earn from playing against you if they win the match. Uri
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.