Author: Don Dailey
Date: 07:50:15 06/05/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 05, 1998 at 04:01:14, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On June 04, 1998 at 23:46:57, Komputer Korner wrote: > >>May I remind everyone that I always said the title of world >>professional/commercial champion was a fraudulent title. There should >>only be one title and that is World Computer Chess Champion. > >But this is too strong. > >When you say fraudulent, you imply that someone is committing fraud. >The ICCA isn't a big organization, exactly which of the officers are you >accusing of commiting fraud, and exactly who are they defrauding and >how? > >The title itself isn't a fraud. Maybe it's a mistake or a bad idea or >obsolete, but it isn't a fraud. > >OK. There is the world microcomputer title. But for years the >tournament was held with a few strong professionals and a bunch of weak >amateurs. So they made an amateur title so the amateurs could have some >reason to go to the tournament, sort of a consolation prize. > >I'm not sure why the professional title exists, since the professional >entries are supposed to win the whole thing. > >Perhaps it is sort of an emergency backup title in case an amateur wins >-- the professionals pay the big entry fee so they should be able to >have a good chance of getting something out of it. > >For whatever reason, the title exists and has a name, and that name is >the name that should be used in advertisements. To do otherwise is the >same as putting "gold medalist" on your box, when you really won the >bronze medal, just because both medals are kind of gold colored. > >bruce I have to admit I agree completely with you. I have always been concerned about the degree to which they break things down. An example is weekend swiss tournaments with many class prizes. The classes are not based on any realistic criteria, only how good you are. No matter how much you suck, you can win a class prize, and your motivation for going is based more or greed than chess, I know this because I've seen players agonizing over the decision to go to this tournament (closer and cheaper) or the other one with big class prizes and steep entry fee's. They all want to feel like champions. The last round of these tournaments is based on whether you should offer a quick draw or not. Waste all that time and money to offer a quick draw to get your consolation prize. Can you imagine us doing the same with computer chess titles? If your program sucks, just create a new category for it so you can win too! My experience is that chess programmers do not need to be motivated artificially and are already doing what they love. Where it does make sense to me is when there is a clear handicap involved. Years ago micro's had little chance and it made a lot of sense to have a separate category. But that has changed. Now there is a separate title, but the world champion is a micro, and the micro world champion is a completely different program. My program was once the "ICCA International computer chess champion." But this wasn't as good as being the "World computer chess champion" even though when I tell people they always remember me saying it was the "World computer chess champion!" It's a pain because I have to go to great lengths to explain the difference, so now I usually tell them "it won a chess tournament" which is simpler for me. - Don
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.