Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 02:52:26 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 00:15:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 16, 2001 at 23:03:49, Chessfun wrote: > >>On April 16, 2001 at 22:39:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 16, 2001 at 16:39:37, Mogens Larsen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 16, 2001 at 16:24:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>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..." >>>> >>>>That would indeed be a nice gesture and in compliance with tournament results as >>>>you mention. But I seriously doubt that the invited programs still left will >>>>miss this golden opportunity for publicity. >>>> >>>>Mogens. >>> >>> >>>Let's see if any have the courage to stand up (or sit down) and do what >>>is right. I doubt it, but I might be surprised... >> >>In all these posts in favor of Shredder you are making, you are forgetting >>one fact. They have been trying to negotiate for three months and have failed. >> >>What do you do when you can't reach agreement on terms? you look elsewhere, >>which is exactly what has happened. >> >>Also who says this has to be billed as the World Champion (Human) v The world >>Champion (Computer)? As I understand it they wish to play a match with the >>strongest computer program, there was no requrement that a known strongest >>already existed. >> >>Sarah. > >I think that the "strongest" program is quite obvious. The ACM events >are played under controlled conditions with (generally) the authors or a >competent representative present to run the engines. Shredder has won >everything for the last 2-3 years... > >If SMK couldn't agree to terms, then I would agree that Kramnik should >"move on" and pick another program. However, I suspect that the "sticking >point" was nothing more than "How much will you pay me to play the match?" >And I don't see why a "rich company" should get to replace a "poor programmer" >just due to wealth... The ICCA titles _do_ mean something, since the ICCA is >associated with FIDE and has sanctioning rights for the WCCC and WMCCC titles >which are the only _official_ titles in computer chess. But the point Sarah is making is that the latest news from Millenium is that they have said no. It means Shredder put itself out of the game. More: the next "world championship" (as they call it) now is played between 2 programs. This is a laughable situation, softly speaking. Ed
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.