Author: Wayne Lowrance
Date: 06:27:31 04/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 18, 2001 at 06:11:04, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: > > >A lot of discussion is going on about the planned Kramnik machine match and I >think it is necessary to give you my point of view about the whole issue. I >refused to play in this event for various reasons which I will sum up below: > >· The final version of the program playing against Kramnik must be made >available to Kramnik end of July already. This makes an match with equal chances >impossible as it will be very easy for Mr. Kramnik to prepare and win a match >against any program under this circumstances. I would even say that it is >possible for human players of my strength to win a match against any program >with this conditions. > >· For a computer to play the match against Kramnik he must win a qualifier >against some other chess programs. This qualification tournament will be called >the BGN computer world chess championships and the winner will be called the BGN >computer chess world champion. I see no reasons to have another computer chess >world championship and another computer chess world champion besides the ICCA >tournaments and the ICCA champion so I will not play there. > >· The first time I have heard about this qualification tournament was two weeks >before the scheduled start of this event. > >· The event will be played with the autoplayer and without any representative of >the programs on site. > >· The starting fee for each program will be $5000. > >· The prize fund in the human machine match will be divided quite uneven in the >case that Kramnik or the computer will win. In this respect the whole issue >seems to me like an event only for Kramnik and the organizers to make big money, >not to play a real match against a computer. > >· There are many more points like a clause that all the micro Deeps can be >kicked out anytime when IBM decides to join or severe restrictions in the >marketing of this event, but I think those given above should be sufficient to >understand my point of view. > >So I have various reasons not to join this thing, each of those being enough not >to join. I hope that all the speculations, wild guesses and accusations >concerning my withdrawal will end, particularly of those guys who even haven’t >seen the contract, including one of my colleagues here. > >Stefan Meyer-Kahlen, author of Shredder. Very good reasons. I now have a better understanding, certainly of your point of view for which I now don't blame you for your stance. I still do not like your stance with SSDF. This whole match has lost it's appeal for me some time ago. I have never liked the clause that the program authors could not run and prepare there own program. This stinks. Kramlick is gonna prepare, indeed has been preparing I am sure now against all of the qualified candidates, learning aforehand, _if I do this, it will do that_ etc etc. Preparing against a human does not give this assurance with any confidence. Hey $5000 is a lot of money I think for the Authors/retailers to just have to sit back, wait for the outcome, not fair play. Wayne
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.