Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: About CC-events in the US

Author: Amir Ban

Date: 02:59:05 11/21/03

Go up one level in this thread


On November 20, 2003 at 23:23:16, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On November 20, 2003 at 14:23:10, Amir Ban wrote:
>
>>On November 20, 2003 at 08:59:25, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>
>>>On November 20, 2003 at 06:57:30, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 18:12:12, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 17:30:36, Amir Ban wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 12:02:56, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:51:59, martin fierz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:34:17, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:30:37, martin fierz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 11:06:21, Matthew Hull wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:55:26, martin fierz wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>On November 19, 2003 at 10:31:54, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>here.  Makes a _lot_ of sense.  And it shows just how "world" aware the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>ICCA actually is.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>i don't really want to be involved in this thread, but i can't resist this
>>>>>>>>>>>>one...
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>disclaimer: of course it would be much more sensible to have the championship in
>>>>>>>>>>>>the US from time to time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>cheapo: so the ICCA does something which is not good for *one* country
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>That's one cheapo that doesn't work.  It would be like 2000 years ago holding
>>>>>>>>>>>gladiator events that discommode only one country, Rome.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>MH
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>of course it works, and you just invite the next follow up cheapo ;-)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>2000 years ago the romans were perhaps not aware that there was much more to the
>>>>>>>>>>world than rome. sometimes one gets the feeling that the US citizens are no
>>>>>>>>>>different in this respect...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Ok, how about holding a world chess championship that only inconviences
>>>>>>>>>Russians.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I think you get the idea.  :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>MH
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>of course i get the idea! i put a disclaimer on my first post stating clearly
>>>>>>>>that IMO the championship should be held in the US from time to time, and i
>>>>>>>>labelled my posts as cheapos :-)
>>>>>>>>i thought that made it clear enough...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>going back to your comparison with the russians: exactly how many american
>>>>>>>>programs are in the top 10 of the SSDF list?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>The SSDF list only uses consumer-grade technology to test programs.  Programs
>>>>>>>tuned to that limited technology will always top that list.  That is why the
>>>>>>>list is of limited importance.  A real WCCC is going to attract high performance
>>>>>>>projects, not just consumer oriented projects.  This is what the New World has
>>>>>>>always offered.  But, Old Worlders have a problem with that I guess.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Do any such New World high performance projects exist ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Crafty can be such a project on practically a moment's notice (I believe).
>>>>>Other programs are similiarly suited.  If the WCCC comes to North America, the
>>>>>projects will materialize.  This was the benefit of limiting the event to every
>>>>>three years and making it a practical event, length-wise.  It provided time for
>>>>>the husbanding of resources, planning, development and sponsorship along with a
>>>>>relative rarity that made the event that much more important and compelling (and
>>>>>thus an easier sell to the people with the expensive resources).
>>>>>
>>>>>The current cycle with it's awkward timing and extended length, along with it's
>>>>>persistent location in Europe (not to mention its archaic modus operendi) seems
>>>>>calculated to favor European commercial interests while excluding projects from
>>>>>North America.
>>>>>
>>>>>Perhaps it is the punishment Europeans are determined to mete out to us for the
>>>>>DB2 triumph, which seems to be universally reviled overseas.  EU types are maybe
>>>>>fed up with the dominance of North American, high-end computer chess projects.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>There's nothing to be fed up with, since the dominance is long gone.
>>>
>>>Yes, the ICGA have seen to that by keeping the WCCC out of North America and
>>>making inconvenient for North Americans to participate.  Nicely done, IMO.
>>>
>>>>Hong Kong
>>>>1995 was the swansong. There were 4 of them there, but losing to Fritz, and even
>>>>before that, in 1992, to Schroeder, underscored that they have lost their
>>>>advantage and so their reason in life.
>>>
>>>
>>>That is a not entirely unreasonable opinion, though still incorrect, IMO.  Bob
>>>addressed the competitive issue in another thread here.  There are American
>>>programs suited to high performance hardware which would have a definite
>>>advantage, even over your project.  Yes?
>>>
>>
>>Sure. There are tens if not hundreds of Americans who would make me look silly
>>with multi-million $ projects and $10 million hardware. The only thing holding
>>them back is that they can't afford to go to Europe.
>>
>>It has been tested once in a Rebel vs. Crafty match where Crafty was given a 100
>>to 1 time advantage. The match was aborted after Rebel won the first game.
>>
>
>How about doing a couple of things:
>
>(1) tell the entire story.  (a) one game doesn't mean _anything_.  (b) Ed
>played multiple games with crafty and rebel having a _very_ long time for
>each move.  Crafty won.  Does that prove anything?  Nope, other than the
>one handicap game was meaningless.
>
>(2) I'll be _happy_ to take you on at 100:1 time odds, anything you think
>you are ready.  I'll even put up a wager to make it interesting.  I am
>talking about a match of at least 10 games.  Interested?  You'd be
>stupid if you were.  Because I wouldn't play _any_ program at that time
>handicap, including the original Sargon...
>

You're on. Please suggest format and let's discuss after WCCC.

Amir


>
>>
>>>But that's not good for business, ist it?  It looks to me that the status quo
>>>favors your interests.
>>>
>>
>>So it's the money motive working here ? This would be an object lesson on how to
>>bring industry giants and ivy-league colleges to their knees: make them travel,
>>or make them get a $50,000 sponsor.
>>
>>Amir
>>
>
>It is _several_ things.  The biggest is that we have an organization
>that was formed with the sole purpose of fostering interest in computer
>chess "around the world".  It is no longer living up to that charter.
>It is now fostering computer chess interest in Europe, mainly.  Which
>is fine.  I've already re-named it to the ECCI or ECGA, which is much
>more descriptive...
>
>It is easily possible to get a company to provide hardware, and some
>publicity money, and even some prize money.  But not a big chunk of
>change that goes into a black hole called the JICGA, which won't
>benefit the donor whatsoever...
>
>If you tax someone too much, they move away.
>
>
>>
>>>Matt
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>To remind you, the current world champion is not European.
>>>>
>>>>Amir



This page took 0.01 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.