Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:46:22 04/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 19, 2001 at 20:18:02, Bruce Moreland wrote: >On April 19, 2001 at 17:51:21, Torsten Schoop wrote: > >>>If I may speculate, what I believe is going on is that Brain Games wants to >>>present this as a match between world champions >> >>note that Kramnik is not the world champion but Anand is. Kramnik is just a >>"privat world champion" (Kramnik LOST the qualification match versus Shirov). >>For that reason it is consistent that he will play against a "privat computer >>world champion". >> >>An afflicted >>Torsten > >I don't want to get too far afield by discussing that at length. I think it is >slightly different, because the schism between FIDE and Kasparov had lasted a >long time. When Kasparov left FIDE, he was the champion, and so he had some >claims to be a champion of some sort. The programs that will be in the playoff >were 3rd and 4th at the last WCCC, if I remember right. > >Why can't those authors and their publisher honor the result of the last WCCC? >Are they trying to say that the result was a fluke, and that Shredder needs to >beat them twice in a row in order to be considered a real champion? Actually, >it's already beaten them twice in a row, so perhaps it needs to beat them three >times. > >I think Bertil's comment that *his* tournament will remove the luck factor is >also silly, given the context. Presumably, they are going to conduct longer >matches. The problem with this is: > >1) There is still luck involved in this. You could do a fairly long match and >only attain a result that would be achieved by a slightly stronger competitor a >few percentage points more significantly than a coin flip. > >2) Even if you can obtain absolute accuracy, this proves little. Let's say that >we choose the best computer at computer vs computer play. The play against >Kramnik is going to be against a human. So a perfectly valid result (the WCCC), >which was obtained in play against all the active strong programs, is thrown out >in favor of something with an extremely small and arbitrarily chosen field? >Please remember that the second place finisher at the last WCCC was not even >notifified about this playoff, much less invited. > >I can deal with this affront to myself, but the affront to Stefan is >intolerable. He's won these events three times. That should be enough to >convince anyone that he deserves to represent us until the next tournament. > >bruce Nah. The reigning logic is "that result is N days old". Newer versions of other programs are obviously stronger. Of course it doesn't matter whether N is 365 or 1 to some...
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.