Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 16:21:22 05/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 03, 2001 at 18:34:46, Larry Proffer wrote: >On May 03, 2001 at 18:04:04, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On May 03, 2001 at 17:04:05, Larry Proffer wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>Given the inconsistencies in the Ed Schroder - Christophe Theron position vis a >>>vis Rebel and Tiger position, participation, withdrawal or whatever in the BGN >>>qualifier, it is not possible to rely, in my opinion, on the statement of Ed >>>Schroder that he did not pursue his entry of Rebel into the qualifier in order >>>to allow him to concentrate on the Tiger entry. >> >>On April 20 I was told a 4th participant was out of the question because >>of time reasons. There was a dead line the Qualifier should end. So I gave >>up on Rebel in favor of Tiger. The choice to favor Tiger was easy because >>I consider Tiger clearly stronger than Rebel in comp-comp. Furthermore the >>SMP Rebel has no autoplayer function (which was a demand) as it runs in a >>simple text based interface (no graphics). >> >>Ed >> >> >>>Therefore relying on the Ed Schroder - Rebel statement to query the press report >>>"with many of the leading programs, such as Shredder and Rebel, refusing to >>>play" is not justifiable. >>> >>>It is perfectly possible that Rebel 'refused' to play and that the press report >>>is accurate. There is a thin line between not pursueing an entry and pulling it >>>out as a withdrawal. >> >>I did not refuse to play. The situation was hectic and asked for fast >>decisions and I did not want to create new obstacles. >> >>Ed >> > >Whoops, I missed that statement (you put in two signatures). > >Ok, you state you didn't refuse to play. > >They say in the press report of the Telegraph that you did refuse, with Rebel. > >Confusing. > >The press says one thing, you say another. Christophe says one thing, you say >another. > >Meanwhile, Matthias (I assume) says that they only had to introduce BGN to CCC >to see how programmers interact and behave, and BGN would instantly be grateful >to deal with a professional organisation. > >A real mess. If you've ever had any personal dealings with the press, you will understand that they screw up on the details almost all the time, and they screw up on the major stuff quite a bit of the time. Especially when the situation is remotely complicated, technical, or controversial. If you are still insinuating that Ed is lying, because of what the article in the paper says, that's crap. bruce
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.