Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 09:08:04 03/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 29, 2002 at 03:34:30, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 28, 2002 at 20:14:27, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: > >>On March 28, 2002 at 13:30:49, Roy Eassa wrote: >> >>> >>>Before the match, I had predicted that Gulko would get one win and a few draws. >>>My best guess was 2.5 points, plus or minus a half point. He scored at the top >>>end of that range. I think he did well. He scored 37.5% against many of >>>today's top programs running on fast computers, at a time control that's not >>>known to be beneficial to humans (yes, I know that he chose the time control). >>>And he's 54 years old (or thereabouts). >>> >>>I say, "Congratulations Mr. Gulko!" >>I would not say the same thing.He thought he could win(that is why he played) >>which shows his gross underestimation of Computers. > >He could win one game against shredder that is >one game more than what some people predicted. > >I also agree with other posters that say that >he played for the money. > >There was no agreement that he gets money only >if he wins the match. > >It may be interesting if there are GM's who agree to play >under the same conditions when they get money only >if they win the match > >Chessbase need to offer more money because of the risk >of not winning. > Regarding compensation for a GM to play a match versus chess program(s): I've always thought that the GM should get a small fixed stipend for just for playing, plus $0 for each loss, $x for each draw as White (where x is very small and perhaps 0), $y for each draw as Black (where y is still pretty small, but larger than x), and $z for each win (where z is much greater than y). Also a BIG bonus for winning the match overall seems to make sense. That would seem to be real incentive to play his (or her) best every game. (Feel free to substitute pounds, Euros, whatever!)
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.