Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Kasparov - Deep Junior: and tablebases draw rule

Author: Russell Reagan

Date: 10:59:53 01/22/03

Go up one level in this thread


On January 22, 2003 at 12:14:20, Sune Fischer wrote:

>My opinion is the game is over when the program hits table bases, from there on
>it can't lose a non-lost position. Only reason to continue would be to wait for
>Kaspy to make a mistake, that is lame IMO.

So in other words, you don't like chess? That is all chess is...waiting for the
other guy to make a mistake. There has never been a perfectly played game that
didn't end in a draw. I'm curious why you are interested in chess with this
view.

>I don't really see how Junior could take the credit for such a win anyway if it
>was _only_ due to the tables.

Here we go again...what makes up a chess playing entity? Let's talk about chess
playing entities. If aliens showed up and played chess perfectly, would we
prejudicely tell them they couldn't play, like we are currently doing with the
computers? "I'm sorry Mr. Alien. You are too good for us. We don't allow
entities better than ourselves to participate because we like to feel like we
are the most advanced things in existence. Now, if you had a toggle switch built
in that would allow us to turn off your endgame tablebases, then we might let
you play." While we're at it, let's get rid of Kasparov and Kramnik too, because
they're just too good for everyone else, so they shouldn't be allowed to use
their strengths.

This reminds me of when I hear on the news about women's rights groups talk
about how they want to be treated "fairly" and have "equal rights". Then minutes
later you hear about how the women's basketball league is complaining because
they don't get paid millions of dollars to play basketball like the men. My
solution is, since they want to be treated fair so badly, go play with the men,
and those that are good enough can play and make millions of dollars. It's
amazing how good that $50,000 a year to play basketball sounds when you put it
to them that way.

In the same way, we are going to place restrictions on some of the computer's
most potent weapons, and then proclaim that we humans are still on top when
Kasparov wins the match, because everyone knows that humans are the most
superior beings in all of existence...

I wish someone would just play a computer without any special rules to their
benefit. I can't remember any such event where there was no special rule
benefitting the human that resulted in the human winning the match. Can anyone
else?



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.