Author: Eelco de Groot
Date: 23:19:01 04/23/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 23, 2001 at 13:35:02, Ed Schröder wrote: >On April 23, 2001 at 11:51:34, Eelco de Groot wrote: > >> >>Ed, I can understand you maybe don't want to discuss this any further here and >>maybe don't have much hope for David Levy's proposals in the present state of >>affairs but does this mean you are not backing the ideas that David Levy put >>forth. I'm not sure how good negotiations between David Levy and Ray Keene would >>go but maybe he can take it up with BGN's chairman Sir jeremy Stanley, the >>former leader of the Tory-party and as a professional diplomat maybe he would be >>open to constructive suggestions. BGN are bound by trilateral contracts, the >>contract with Kramnik is at least in place since November, as I understood from >>this link http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/618/news/n_781.htm. But they state >>there they want to see a match with "the World's strongest computer". >> >>If they are really serious about that I don't see why they wouldn't listen to >>proposals that are backed by the ICCA and the computer-chess community. >> >>So Chris Whittington may consider David Levy's proposals just a "spoiler" but I >>think they deserve a hearing. Anyway that's just my personal opinion. >> >> Groeten, >> Eelco > > >Hi Eelco, > >I have given my opinion already. I can refine it a bit, here is: > >The 5 highest rakings of the WC should play a full (double?) round against 5 >grandmasters. The best program is the challenger of the human world champion. >Thus an ICCA job. > >In the meantime others (such as BGN) may do the same only that they should >invite programs on the same WC base and not just ignore whole series of >programs. > >Meaning to say there should be at least a reference, I think the WC is a >good base. > >Ed Okay Ed it's a nice idea but that gives the added complexity of organizing such a tournament and finding five strong grandmasters who don't have a busy schedule right now. Not that BGN didn't have time to organize things better if they had thought it was important. But I'm reading you more here as saying: "If they find SMP and Deep versions so important then I can stress the importance of a program performing well against humans, if the aim is to choose a good challenger for Kramnik". Well, I can understand that. I also want to say that I think Stefan Meyer-Kahlen is to be commended for his willingness to put his title on the line against other programs in principle. Even if this would be another sort of World Title, Shredder was willing to play and that is great! Just my opinion again, Thanks! Eelco BTW that should have been Sir Jeremy Hanley of course, not Stanley. I apologize to Duncan!
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.