Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:57:40 04/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 05:52:26, Ed Schröder wrote: >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 Supposed _I_ set up a tournament to choose the program to play? And then suppose _I_ said "if you want in, send me $50,000 to enter your program."?? Would you enter even if you _knew_ Rebel xx was the best in the world? And risk that kind of money to get in knowing that one game can be lost due to a bad book line or bug? Charging an entry fee is a bit of a joke, IMHO. It means the deeper your pockets, the better your chances...
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.