Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 14:25:18 04/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 22, 2001 at 16:35:47, Mike S. wrote: >Kramnik *has won* a match against *Kasparov*. > >Deep Shredder *has not won* (nor played) a match against *Deep Blue*. The two events are completely unrelated despite the reference in the press release. Two different exhibition events. >I think BGN is of course aware of that they need to meet decisions, which can be >seriously argued in front of a worldwide audience. 9 rounds swiss is a weak >argument, when various strong programs, different test, match and tournament >results are around to be taken into consideration, and: none of the current >leading programs has proven yet to be in the same league as Deep Blue was. >Therefore, a qualifying was BGN's logical conclusion IMO. Unfortunately, it can easily be argued that a narrow selection process is equally arbitrary. But it's easier to explain for the uninformed public the obviousness of the choices made. >The event planned by Brain Games has a totally different dimension in terms of >hardware, publicity, influence on public opinion about chess and computer chess >etc. than an ICCA Championship. So if some think an ICCA title is the one and >only argument which counts, they just don't realise this dimension (and even the >ICCA realises it somehow as it seems). ICCA is simply covering its back IMO. Everyone knows that it would be impossible to make the suggested alterations given contracts signed and time available. The only impressive dimension is the bucks involved. Regards, 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.