Author: Peter Kasinski
Date: 08:28:20 01/27/03
In one of the posts Bruce observed that chess was a zero-sum game. I understand the math of it, but reading it made me realize the predicament of computer chess fans. It appears that emotionally all these contests follow a downward spiral. Any rational outcome leaves people dissatisfied. We start in awe of the human player as nothing else provides a worthy backdrop to the admired chess programs. We want to witness the Herculean effort needed to contain the monsters. But what when the fight is over? A human win by definition undermines the hype about computer chess. An injured monster? We object. Surely a better program, faster CPU, or at least a decent book, were not too much to ask. On the other hand - a computer win instills fear that our passion is perhaps being solved and rendered trivial and uninteresting. That’s why rational explanations are not accepted. Conspiracies and higher intervening powers are summoned to prolong the illusion that the next contest can be as fulfilling as this one was meant to be. I (for one) remain grateful for this opportunity to admire both sides, with their talent, and passion, and energy on display. I believe that this is but a fleeting moment and that in 10 years or so, no one will be interested in a contest like this again. Chess is not being solved, but perhaps our (human) ability to dispute this point over the board is fading rapidly. Let’s sit back and admire. PK
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.