Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:52:34 11/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2003 at 10:38:03, Tony Werten wrote: >On November 19, 2003 at 10:26:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 19, 2003 at 05:30:13, Amir Ban wrote: >> >>>On November 19, 2003 at 04:59:59, Daniel Clausen wrote: >>> >>>>Hi >>>> >>>>I've read the thread concerning the WCCC2003 in Graz and I think both sides have >>>>good points. (I just wish they'd listened more to each other ;) >>>> >>>>I have some questions/remarks though: >>>> >>>>(1) >>>>Would you guys (esp. from the US) prefer it if the WCCC event would be held over >>>>the internet in general or once in the US, once in Europe or something like >>>>that? >>>> >>> >>>Why not hold golf tournaments over the internet ? What's the point of everyone >>>being on the same green ? >>> >>>Anyone who does not want to travel to a world chamionship is probably not >>>sufficiently interested in being a world champion. >> >>That's pure bullshit. I am a good example. I played in every ACM event >>from 1976 to 1994, and in most of the early WCCC events. But eventually >>some "do-gooder" decided that we needed so many rounds that we could not do >>it in a weekend + 1-2 days of a regular week, and it became impossible for >>me to attend. IE I teach two classes each semester. It doesn't seem reasonable >>for me to just dump class for two weeks to attend a WMCCC event in Europe. It >>is expensive, the extra travel time stretches my absense, etc. >> >>It isn't because of lack of interest. As I have mentioned, my program played >>its first move in 1968. When did yours play its first move? Let's count >>and compare _years_. That quantifies _my_ interest level. However, I also >>have students to look out for, and they have to come first, IMHO. >> >>The last ACM event I played in was a five-rounder. Not enough? Perhaps not, >>but we played two rounds on Sunday, one on monday tuesday and wednesday nights. >>Others had more games on the weekend and only two week nights. Which made >>missing one class meeting per class not so bad as tests could be scheduled. >> >>This is not about "lack of interest". It is about "job responsibility" and >>"costs". >> >>> >>> >>>>(2) >>>>In case such events would be held over the internet, how would you make sure >>>>that cheating is not likely to happen? I think Russell suggested little 'hubs' >>>>around the world (like in Europe, US, Asia, Australia, etc) so that everyone can >>>>participate in the event but there would be some sort of control. I think that's >>>>a very interesting idea, although it seems to be very hard to actually do it >>>>since it requires a lot of organization and costs money. >>>> >>>>While I think the measurements against cheating in the upcoming CCT-event are >>>>reasonable, it seems obvious to me, that one has to do more than that if the >>>>'importance' of the event is higher. >>>> >>>>(3) >>>>I believe there is enough interest in CC-tournaments in the US. But I have to >>>>ask the simple question: Why aren't there any? I mean, in Europe it's noth just >>>>WCCC, it's also Leiden, it's Paderborn, and maybe some others too. What >>>>tournament is held in the US? There has to be a reason for it. It's not lack of >>>>interest, it's not lack of sponsors, so what is it? (this is not meant as a >>>>flame, but as a serious question :) >>>> >>> >>>There's interest and interest. Interest where no money, time or stepping outside >>>your home is involved is not very high. >> >>You seem to have a huge problem differentiating "interest" from >>"responsibility". I'll say it once more. My _interest_ in computer chess >>is obviously as high as anyone that is active, and probably is _higher_. Why >>else have I continued this for a full 35 years of computer chess programming? >>Who else has had the interest to sustain working on chess programs for 35 >>years? I can't think of a single person. However, I also have a responsibility >>to students taking (and paying for) courses I teach. And I take that _just_ >>as seriously. > >He is not doubting your interest in computerchess, he's doubting your interest >in becoming worldchampion. > >As you said before, you've already won it twice. He might be right. Not even close. There are two parts. (1) interest in competing. That is what originally attracted me to the first ACM event I attended in 1976. Not the idea of winning, but the idea of competing. (2) interest in winning. I always have that. I would _not_ attend any event if I didn't want to compete. Note that "compete" means "try to win". The "competition" part of this can be satisfied via ICC today. It is just as big a challenge to stop a GM from beating me in kingside attacks, or drawing with blocked positions, as it is to play in an ACM event. For me, it's a matter of "time" rather than "interest". > >Tony > >> >> >>> >>>Amir
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.