Author: Jim Bodkins
Date: 22:50:19 11/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 2003 at 22:48:42, Roger D Davis wrote: >I have to wonder how the latest screw up should be interpreted in the total >history of the tournament. One perspective is that the Law of Karma is finally >kicking in. In this scenario, the tournament committee handled the List affair >awkwardly by being too rigid and authoritarian in their interpretation of the >rules. Ironically, they essentially quote the charter on the Chessbase site to >excuse themselves for having to disqualify List. Even when there were dissenting >opinions on this board, with some of the programmers themselves saying that they >wouldn't reveal their own source, that circumstantial evidence wasn't enough for >the committee to act upon, etc., there was no subsequent clarification of the >circumstances of the disqualification. The rules are the rules, as they say (and >said). > >But...the List decision being BS, and there being balance and fairness in the >Universe, the Law of Karma kicked in as a means of showing us exactly how >hypocritical the tournament is: The rules are the rules when it's convenient to >excuse the behavior of the committee, but are open to interpretation in another >circumstance where they should apply. The effect of the Law of Karma is seen in >the consequences of this behavior, which is to undermine, if not invalidate, the >meaning of the IGCA world championship title. > >The Law of Karma interpretation has a lot to recommend it, because it proposes >that even if tournament committees act hypocritically and unfairly, at some >level there is justice in the universe, and that if fairness is flaunted, then >while the Universe may not be able to correct the result, it will at least >render the result completely absurd and meaningless. By this reasoning, the >latest snafu is actually required in order for Karmic balance to be achieved. > >Unfortunately, the Law of Karma interpretation also supposes the operation of >unseen forces, and cannot be called the most parsimonious interpretation. Maybe >fairness, unlike matter and energy, is not conserved. Maybe there are only >events that happen, and while it's possible to chronicle them and note strange >coincidences, these coincidences are just nothing more than statistical >aberrations, with meaning imposed upon them. > >By this explanation, the latest snafu with Shredder is simply history repeating >itself. The causality at work is not the causality of Karma, but the causality >of stupidity, the fact that if you screw up once in a critical situation (e.g., >with List), you're likely to screw up again, no matter how much egg you already >have on your face. > >For the tournament committee, the problem is that the Shredder snafu puts the >List issue in a completely different light, because it shows us how incompetent >the committee really is. At it's maximum, it means that the List issue becomes >more significant, because the issues involved must be reevaluated in the context >of the committee's latest faux pas. > >Take your pick. > >Roger I would use the word comeuppance. I expect ICGA to be shadowed by this for some time. (Which is a shame for the sake of the developers. It will follow them as well). And I couldnt agree more regarding the committees imcompetance. It appears to me that either the committee needs an overhaul or there needs to be a new committee. This is the committee that sanctions Twixt as well I believe. Heady company. Sorry for the sarcasm, but why precisely doesnt computer chess have a chess governing body in this area. For that matter, why isnt computer chess governed by FIDE. I'm sure they did their best and meant well. I believe that a better job could have been done, whether by ICGA or some other organization. I believe that needs to happen. I dont know why FIDE doesnt sanction these computer tournaments, even though they do sanction 'events'. http://www.fide.com/calendar/fidecalendar.phtml?view=8
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.