Author: Rajen Gupta
Date: 04:14:07 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
Hi mogens: i think the millenium website report is not quite true: the comp vs comp selection is to be held in full view of the press as well as other chess experts. a representative from shredder was invited and the $5000 was to be refunded to the eliminated programmes. so it would have been a fairly iopen fair and unbiased match.at least this is what bertil had mentioned in his post and i have no reason to doubt him. rajen On April 17, 2001 at 06:33:15, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 17, 2001 at 05:05:02, Rajen Gupta wrote: > >>if one sits backand and takes a dispassionate view of the upcoming man vs >>machine event i think we are all missing the woods for the trees. >> >>1)that Braingames has manged to get kramnik's agreement to play such a match is >>itself extremely creditable; besides being able to find the necessary >>sponsorship etc. Kasparov after losing to deep blue has on several occasions >>refused to participate against a computer. > >For all we know it could be mentioned as an obligation for the BGN champion. I >think it was mentined as a preface to the Kasparov-Kramnik match. > >>2) in order to find a worhty opponent for kramnik the best commercially >>available hardware/software combination needs to be found-ideally something that >>a budding bobby fischer can say ''wow'' thats a neat programme i want it-and get >>his mom to pop down to his friendly neighbourhood store(or cyberstore) and buy >>it.with dual athlons being available in the near term even explosive hardware is >>within the reach of joe public > >It doesn't have to be commercial, free or anything else. It's a man vs. machine >event, not commercial demonstration. > >>3) while there are a lot of strong single cpu progs that could be in contention >>there is no doubt that any of the 3 SMP progs on a 8 way xeon 933 with 2mb on >>die cache would clobber the best single CPU prog rather badly. > >That is most likely true. The SMP requirement is okay. > >>4) currently there are only 3 commercially available SMP progs available and >>they will be playing each other to find which is the best one. whats wrong with >>that? if shredder is the best no doubt it will beat the other 2. if it loses >>then it wasn't the strongest any way in spite of it being the world comp >>champion.in the meanwhile we''l get the added benefit of enjoying a series of >>smp comp vs comp matches!on top level hardware. > >Shredder has pulled out, so it's only two. Not surprising since they've probably >been confronted with terms they found unacceptable in the original negotiations. >May I suggest reading this article > >http://www.computerchess.com/news_e.html#living_room. > >Obviously, the content isn't exactly unbiased, but it's better than nothing. > >>5) someone needs to organise the above selection and in the considered opinion >>of the sponsor braingames and perhaps their chess expert(GM Keene) enrique >>irazoqui and bertil eklund are the best people to do so having had a great deal >>of expertise and experience in comp chess.i dont think anyone really doubts >>their personal integrity. > >Probably, but the arrangement stinks. > >>6)there is obviously a time frame for such things-quite certain that kramnik as >>well as the sponsors could change their minds at the drop of a hat so this has >>to get going while the time is right-which menns that the time available for >>testing (as well as developing the software is limited). if only one of the >>above 3 was arbitrarily selected there would have been more questions as to >>whether it is the srtongest. > >The event is scheduled in october if I remember correctly, so there's time. > >Selecting Shredder wouldn't have been an arbitrary choice, because it has a >title. The only justification for choosing between Junior and Fritz now is their >commercial status. > >>7)no method of testing or selection is perfect-but this seems to be quite a >>reasonable method > >Nope. > >>8) i think all of us computer chess lovers should encourage this venture raher >>than trying to tear it aprt.after all if it is succesful there would hopefully >>be repeat performances. > >The match will probably be interesting regardless of challenger. But I believe >that discarding titles and fairness on behalf of commercial interest to >accomplish that, is too high a prize to pay. In essence, it was a Kramnik vs. >ChessBase match from the minute the invites were sent. That shouldn't be >repeated. > >>i think its time to close this chapter and move on to other matters > >That is true. > >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.