Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 17:54:21 10/14/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2002 at 20:29:57, Mike S. wrote: >On October 14, 2002 at 15:52:35, Rolf Tueschen wrote: > >>On October 14, 2002 at 13:58:04, Mike S. wrote: >>>(...) >>>Do you really think that Kramnik takes any notice of the Schiller website and >>>what's published there? Or that he even cares for details of the qualifying >>>process? >> >>Mike, are you an adult yourself? Because I can't understand your question. But >>let me try to explain something to you. Someone plays a show match, ok? And he >>gets 1 million dollars if he wins, right? And you want to make that point that >>this someone, no matter who that might be, would well be concentrated on chess, >>camels and his water bottle, but not on the question what the whole event should >>be all about? I'm trying to understand you, that's all. I won't teach you >>something you might be too young to understand for... >> >>(Was I god enough in my response to a clever spin doctor?) > >Probably yes, because after reading your answer I nearly couldn't remember what >my question was (if it wouldn't be written above)... Yes, and the only question that is important for me that is the question if Kramnik is being aware of being just a tool in the PR action for ChessBase. As far as Braingames or Einstein is concerned, I really wished to know who sits behind it and who takes the greatest profit out of it. For me the only interesting company is ChessBase and nothing else. If I read what Enrique Irazoqui, the famous arbiter, wrote how he wanted to exclude and decide, I get the impression that several people might have strong "interests" in the whole business. You don't write such things just for fun. > >>(...) Kramnik was convinced that Fritz had earned the >>right to play him in a "tournament" somehow that Fritz won fair and straight. >>Which is simply not true! It's interesting that Ed Schröder and also Bertil >>Eklund are both convinced that Enrique Irazoqui did a bad job in Barcelona when >>he excluded (with the help of ChessBase of course) SHREDDER, REBEL, TIGER etc. >>And I wrote it already months, if not years ago. That Kramnik must justify his >1 million dollar prize money, I wrote it _before_ the 5th game already. > >Kramnik is the wrong address for the qualification issue. It was never his >business, he doesn't need to care about that. The address for doubts and >critizism for that was Braingames IMO, IOW Raymond Keene. AFAIK he was the one >to collect suggestions, come to a decision and to organise. > >Kramnik may have said that Fritz qualified in a tournament, ok, but I doubt that >this is important for him. Maybe it was the interviewers question, and he just >said something. I think you overestimate that. Simple question. Do you think that such a chess genius is not interested in what a match he's involved and with whom? And what do you think about the justification he must find for the 1 million dollars prize money? Here you can see that he's just part of the PR campaign. But as you know I see you in the same boat more or less working for CSS. You are not independant, or? I ask that because I can read elsewhere that journalists of CSS are not independant. > >>(...) But the point >>is that Fritz is simply not the opponent for Kramnik. And I write this before I >>know the end result because it doesn't matter how it will end. The first 4 >>games proved what I said. It's simply a joke! > >Before the match I expected 2...3 points for Fritz, not more (still do). I think >it's ok to challenge the World Champion, even if it is unlikely to win. As you could see in games 1-4 Fritz could take 1 to 2 points perhaps. But the points are less important than the quality of his play. And I think we saw what a stupid prog Fritz is. It's good for training of course and I like it. > >Did you mean another (type of) program would be a better opponent? For future >events of that kind, I'd like (too) that different programs will compete. It >starts with Kasparov - Junior soon, probably. Of course it will depend if there >is a qualification before, preferable with more programs next time, or if the >opponent is simply chosen from the first place of an existing tournament or >list. I find that such events are show events. For me such commercial progs are no GM, period. But you like to twist and tweak and so you can imply a higher rating because nothing is really at stake for the human GM. > >(A large comp-human tournament with a comp team against an IM/GM team, >scheveningen system, would be an optimal qualifying final IMO... but I'm afraid >that's very expensive.) Let's do that in 15 or 20 years. But today the progs are simply too weak. Listen please, what was the result of Alterman against all the progs at the Maastricht Wch????? - Did you forget that????? - Are you also a member of the hyperbole? (Please read http://hometown.aol.de/rolftueschen/11.html about Realitätsverlust.) Rolf Tueschen > >Regards, >M.Scheidl
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.