Author: Terry McCracken
Date: 06:31:47 03/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 18, 2002 at 08:16:47, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 18, 2002 at 08:06:28, Terry McCracken wrote: > >>On March 18, 2002 at 04:38:05, Mark Schreiber wrote: >> >>>On March 17, 2002 at 22:47:02, Terry McCracken wrote: >>> >>>>On March 17, 2002 at 20:55:29, Mark Schreiber wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 17, 2002 at 18:17:49, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 17, 2002 at 17:52:47, Mark Schreiber wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On March 17, 2002 at 17:42:06, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On March 17, 2002 at 16:35:05, Mark Schreiber wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Where is Gulko playing? >>>>>>>>>It seems he is playing in the privacy of his home. >>>>>>>>>Is there a judge checking that there is no cheating? >>>>>>>>>Is there someone to check he is not using a computer for assistance. >>>>>>>>>Is he allowed to us a computer for assistance? >>>>>>>>>What are the rules of this match? >>>>>>>>>Mark >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Why don't you find out more about the match before posting things that might >>>>>>>>imply impropriety on GM Gulko's part? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>He hardly needs to cheat. If he did I'd say why didn't he crush Deep Junior 7? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Terry >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I have looked at the announcements of the sponsors Chessbase and >>>>>>>KasparovChess.com. I have asked on this and KasparovChess.com bulletin boards. I >>>>>>>have sent emails to the sponsors Chessbase and KasparovChess.com. I have not >>>>>>>found any answers or any rules to the match. I do not make these statements >>>>>>>lightly. Have you found any information to the contrary? >>>>>>>Mark >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>The point I was trying to make which seems to allude you for some reason is, you >>>>>>DON'T ask questions in such a way as to cast doubt on the CREDIBILITY of >>>>>>Grandmaster Boris Gulko! >>>>>> >>>>>>That is simply WRONG! >>>>>> >>>>>>Terry >>>>> >>>>>These credibility questions are natural. If you don’t want credibility questions >>>>>make the rules and match public. >>>>>Mark >>>> >>>>Tell that to Grandmaster Boris Gulko! >>>> >>>>Shay Bushinsky author of Junior 7 along with Amir Ban explained the Match Rules, >>>>and trusts GM Gulko's integrity. >>>> >>>>The problem with your question assumes GM Gulko could and might cheat! >>>> >>>>Now if he wins the match you and others might say GM Gulko may have cheated! >>>> >>>>It is simply wrong to challenge GM Gulko's honesty. >>>> >>>>It's not even a serious match, why would he even bother to cheat? >>>> >>>>His credentials are impressive, and I expect a close score, giving the edge to >>>>GM Gulko. >>>> >>>>Terry >>> >>>Where are the match rules? I missed them. >>>I am not challenging GM Gulko credibility as much as I am challenging the >>>sponsors to make a better tournament. >>>This is a serious match. There are 2 well known sponsors Chessbase and >>>KasparovChess.com with many people analyzing the games. >>>Compare Gulko’s credentials to Loek Van Wely. Loek Van Wely, rated 95 points >>>higher than Gulko, drew a 4 game computer match at slower time control against 1 >>>program. >>>Common sense says the computers should win. >>>Mark >> >>Well you don't have any common sense! Your statement above is specious! >> >>Forget about Chessbase, This Is NOT a SRERIOUS MATCH. >> >>Shay Bushinsky explained this to you, it's out of Mr. Gulko's home, it's a >>casual match. >> >>Mr. Gulko is a very seasoned veterern, and an expert against computers. >> >>Comparing him with GM Loek van Wely makes little sense, there is less then 100 >>pts. between them, and Loek van Wely may not be any stronger than Gulko, in fact >>the reverse may be true! >> >>Loek van Wely drew a 4 game match. So? Do you understand the game? If you did >>you would realize Loek van Wely with the exception of game 3 a truly bueatiful >>game for Rebel, had complete control of the match and out-played Rebel, letting >>a easy draw which was a difficult win slip through his fingers and lost the >>game. >> >>Had Loek van Wely drew game 1 which he could have, Ed offered, he would have won >>the match. >> >> >>Wake up....GM's are still tearing comps. apart when they know their weaknesses! >> >>GM's are super strong and people don't seem to "get" that around here except for >>a few. >> >>Terry > >Rebel's result against van wely is not the only good performance of computers >against GM's. I'm not ignorant Uri, I know this, and I know the reverse is also true. > >I also do not think that van wely had complete control of the match. >Getting better position in most games is not enough. Ah...Uri be realistic, except for GM Loek van Wely's overconfidence in game 1 which cost him, he coverted his other 2 games with advantage into brilliant wins. Rebel did produce a most wonderful game in game 3 which shows the excellent programming abilities of Ed Schroder and my "Hat's Off" to Ed! > >if one player gets a better position only to blunder and lose later than this >player has not complete control on the game. > >Uri It's called "Human Fatigue" Uri. Of course he had control, if he was SUPERMAN and couldn't tire he would have at least drawn the game. He could have had a draw as I pointed out but he refused. Loek van Wely was in control for most of the match and any honest critically thinking person would see this. Terry
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.