Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:35:15 08/29/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 29, 2001 at 23:23:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 29, 2001 at 05:37:17, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: > >>> >>>1. Amateur: >>> You cannot be an amateur if you earn money by the selling of your program, >>> (that would be a commercial interest), so the amateurs cannot be receiving >>> money from the game-company... >> >>How about programmers who had once (say 2 years ago) obtained an amount of money >>for publishing their program (i guess young talents fall into this). Do they >>have to be non-Amateurs for the rest of their lives ? >> >>I'm sorry, but I think it's not possible to make a clear and fair >>classification. IMHO, one should omit this nonsense completely. >> >>Regards, Uli >> >>>2. Semi-professional: >>> Are you an associate of a games-programming company if you let them >>> sell your program and receive some money for it? >>> Unclear. >>> Have the named programs become "commercial products" by advertising >>> and selling them in the same way as the game-company's flagship-products? >>> Yes, I think so! >>> So the named programs cannot be semi-professionals. >>>3. Professional: >>> Apparently the question if the programmers are heavily income-dependent >>> on their game progams is NOT relevant to the organisers. Strange... >>> >>>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 van der Storm > > >I view this just like the USCF views titles. Once you are a master, you are >a master, even if your rating drops to 1500. Once you are a professional, you >are a professional for life, period. Changing back and forth just because you >couldn't sell a program for two years is nonsensical. Once you are a pro >baseball player, you are a pro for life. You can _never_ get your amateur >status back in that sport. The problem here is not the definition but the fact that professional need to pay 500$ for participating. I think it is unfair to ask people to pay 500$ for participating only because they earned money some years ago. In chess there are tournaments when GM's and IM's do not have to pay money when other need to pay so the situation is different from computer chess when it is exactly the opposite and professionals need to pay more money. Uri
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.