Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: NEW DEFINITION of Amateur, Semi-pro and Pro in game-development

Author: Theo van der Storm

Date: 15:42:32 08/29/01

Go up one level in this thread


On August 29, 2001 at 17:30:50, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On August 29, 2001 at 16:41:54, Theo van der Storm wrote:
>>On August 29, 2001 at 05:37:17, Ulrich Tuerke wrote:
...
>>>I'm sorry, but I think it's not possible to make a clear and fair
>>>classification.
>>I think it is possible.
>>Even if my text is still not good anough and needs a lawyer to fix it.
>>Here goes my 1,5ct worth:
>>
>>amateur:
>>A programmer is an amateur if he is not a professional,
>>nor an employd scientist involved with game-theory at any time
>>and has not received money for his game-development in the last 12 months.
>
>The 12 month requirement is a contradiction of "once a professional, always a
>professional"

No, it is not.
The 12 month requirement only distinguishes amateur and semi-professional.

>>semi-professional:
>>A programmer is a semi-professional if he is not an amateur nor a professional.
>>
>>professional:
>>A programmer is a professional if during any full year his income
>>from game-development has been bigger than any other part of his income.
>
>What if he has a large stock portfolio, but works on computer chess programming
>12 hours a day, 6 days a week for a computer chess company?

His game programming work will provide a bigger income than
"The large stock portfolio", so he is a professional :-)
Now he has become a top lawyer for a US political party for only
20 hours/week, because there will not be presidential elections this year.
Still this makes more money than his additional 40 hour game-development:
Then he's a semi-professional, which seems right to me!
You are welcome to disagree... Distinguishing amateurs
from the other two categories is a more important issue anyway.

>How will you discover someone's real income?  In many countries, tax records
> are not publicly available.
In case of serious doubt he should show his submitted tax-form to the
organisation, but I agree this is a bit cumbersome.
Maybe work on their conscience?

>>So:
>>Once a professional, always a professional.
>>A professional in Chess-programming must also be considered a
>>professional in Amazons-programming.
>>Switching between amateur and semi-professional is possible
>>depending on the circumstances.
>>
>>> IMHO, one should omit this nonsense completely.
>>IMHO,   one should omit this needless frustration completely.
>>As a matter of fact in the Dutch Computer-chess championship we
>>never had such a distinction and I'm not proposing to introduce it either.
>>So my text is just an advice in case ICCA does continue on this road.
>>
>>>Regards, Uli
>>>...
>>>>I feel the definitions need mending. My internet connection is about
>>>>to break due to idle(eh?) time, so I cannot give my proposed exact
>>>>definitions yet. Maybe later.
>>>>
>>>>Theo
>>Theo van der Storm (I'm back)
>
>I don't see any clear solution.
>
>Why do the professional programs have to pay so much?
>What are the expenses involved that require such large fees?

My sympathy is more with the amateurs.
For a poor student $100 is a lot of money.

>I would think that a sponsoring university could be found that would not charge
>thousands of dollars for the use of the fascilities.

Although I was NOT involved in the Maastricht organisation,
I happen to know, that many universities have established a kind of
self-supporting facilities department in order to cut over-all costs.
Other departments, among which the sponsor, simply have to pay.
Usually these are budgeted internal cost, except for special events...

Theo van der Storm



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.