Author: Gordon Rattray
Date: 11:13:45 05/02/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 2001 at 12:30:28, Fernando Villegas wrote: >Your long analysis whould be addressed to Brain Games, not to Enrique. And Brain >Game could say to you: it's me who organizes the match, then it's me who put the >rules". Period. Sure, but people don't have to support it. >When we live an age when one comp tourn after another fall in pieces, we just >should be happy to have some extra events, no matter the shortcomings. The issue >of the names, BEST this, BEST that, is not important. What do you expect? That >they say "K. Vs maybe the second best, K. Vs just a good one, K. againts some of >the many programs in the top, K. fighting a a decent program..." ? >Come on, man, this is business and without business we have nothing. Better >something than nothing. >Besides, DF and DJ are AT LEAST two of the maybe three tops programs. The third >one could be Tiger or Ferret, who knows. But it is only one of the three. >Fernando You say "better something than nothing"... it's easy for you to say! What about the chess programmers who have worked for years on their programs!!! It's totally unfair to expect these programmers just to accept being unfairly dismissed from a match that people will generally regard as involving the best computer program available, especially after the "Kasparov vs. Deep Blue" match set the tone for "best human versus the best computer". It doesn't matter how good DF or DJ are. All that matters it *how* and *why* they qualified for the match when others didn't. If it's because the organisers wanted it that way, then they are entitled to do that, but they cannot mislead people thereafter. What if Kramnik is defeated? Are the organisers going to state that DF may not be the best program available? Are they going to emphasise to the public that only SMP programs were considered? etc etc The organisers may be entitled to organise as they wish, but it doesn't give them the right to false claims, and this will happen. I do however accept your point is that there is a strong business aspect to this match. But what's good for business, isn't necessarily good in other aspects, i.e. morally correct. In short, this match is being driven by money. That's fine for those making the money. Unfortunately however these people don't put the interests of computer chess first. Gordon
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.