Author: Marc van Hal
Date: 03:27:20 04/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 28, 2001 at 20:57:36, Robert Raese wrote: >On April 28, 2001 at 11:36:59, Jeroen Noomen wrote: > >>Dear prof. Irazoqui, >> >>During the past few weeks all chess enthousiasts and chess computer fans were >>delighted to hear about the Braingames qualifier, to produce a ‘challenger’ to >>play Vladimir Kramnik in a serious match. Organisation was given to you, a >>pretty easy to understand decision as you have a lot of experience in organizing >>a chess computer tournament. I know you since several years as a fine person, >>unbiased and with a lot of understanding concerning chess programs. I always >>have been an admirer of your work, especially the famous Cadaques Tournament. >> >>Needless to say I was stunned to hear that Chess Tiger, currently one of the >>strongest chess programs, was not even invited to participate in this qualifier. >>I tried to get information about the ‘why’, but up till now nobody has given any >>specific argument why Chess Tiger could not play there. To exclude such a strong >>program is, of course, very strange (to say the least). Several people have >>asked me why Chess Tiger is not participating. I only could say ‘I don’t know, >>sorry’. >> >>Suppose there will be a qualifying event amongst human players to bring about a >>new challenger for Kramnik. Wouldn’t it be very strange if the organisers of >>such an event would say to Anand ‘sorry, you can’t compete’? Nobody would >>understand that. As in this case nobody understands your decision why you >>refrain from letting Chess Tiger play in these qualification matches. Therefore >>I want to ask you, publicly through this letter, to clarify matters and to >>present the chess enthousiasts the answers on the following questions: >> >>1. Why wasn’t Chess Tiger invited to this qualifier? >>2. Why did the Chess Tiger team only hear about this qualifier some weeks before >>the event started? >>3. Why did you refuse to let Chess Tiger play, even though the Tiger team very >>willingly cooperated to make the participation of Chess Tiger possible? >>4. Why didn’t you try to find a positive solution to this matter? >>5. Why did you keep on saying ‘no’, even when it became clear Chess Tiger could >>play under the conditions you wanted? >>6. Why did you refuse to believe that Chess Tiger could play under your >>conditions, the more because you haven’t checked this out yourself? >>7. Do you think it is fair to exclude very strong chess programs from such an >>event? >>8. What proposal was made to the IBM team: Could they play on their own >>hardware, or did they have to play on specified hardware? >>9. What was the reason IBM declined the offer? >>10. Knowing you as a fair person, unbiased and with great achievements for >>computer chess, can you now look into a mirror and say to yourself ‘I have been >>absolutely fair to all parties and I have been honest to all the other chess >>programmers who are not competing now’? >>11. I am pretty sure that deep inside you, you will not feel happy about this. >>And that you know that programs like Shredder and Chess Tiger should compete as >>well. Am I correct in stating this? >>12. Now there is a delay in the Fritz-Junior match, is there room for Chess >>Tiger in this event? >> >>I think everybody would appreciate it when you give a public statement and >>answer those questions in an honest way. Otherwise people will get the >>impression that this qualifier is a pre arranged event, that is not open to all >>the strongest chess programs, but only to some of them. It is up to you to >>clarify matters and to make clear why Chess Tiger is not playing here. I think >>you owe us an explanation. >> >>You made a clear mistake by excluding Chess Tiger from this event. That is my >>opinion and I know many people will agree with me. Still, making mistakes is >>human, it can happen to everybody. Truly great people are those people who admit >>they made a mistake and correct it. You are still able to correct this mistake, >>too. By allowing Chess Tiger to play in the qualifier. >> >>I ask you to give the answers to these questions, questions that many people are >>wondering about. And that you correct your mistake and let Chess Tiger play in >>the qualifier. >> >>Sincerely yours, >> >>Jeroen Noomen > > >as a newcomer to this forum, and as a "fan" i feel deprived of a much more >interesting match because only two competitors are playing. if the match with >kramnik is in october, there is PLENTY of time to run a tournament that includes >all top competitors. > >one reads many good testimonials about professor irazoqui, that he is honest and >of good character... so why this strange match? why was tiger and other strong >programs ignored? seems like the reasons given so far are like shifting sands. > >i too would be interested to hear from professor irazoqui on these points. If it is the statement that Kramnik would have a change to loose only against a speedy monster then it's simply bull. I am pretty sure without analyses (my analyses) made before the game started. Kramnik would loose from Rebel 10 with anti GM on a 300Mhz machine as well. It is precisely because of this that GM's beat computers on regular bases nothing else
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.