Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 05:41:22 04/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
Of course - I don't know how USA Corp. does function. As I said, IBM/Hsu violated the spirit a) of the science experiment and b) of the ethics in chess. Hence they killed not only the relationship to their golden duck Kasparov but also their status in computerchess. How could you think for a minute that Kasparov was the loser in that show? Yes, you like so many Americans, you are possessed by mere numbers of the result, but as I said, chess has its own codex of honor. Go figure my evaluation shortly after Hsu's appearance on the last press conference when he answered Kasparov's speech. See r.g.c.c. via Google. Hsu smiled, but was extremely nervous and didn't comment on Kasparov as if he, Hsu, defined all the future of the show. He completely missed that Kasparov wasn't the one he could dog around in any thinkable manner. Now Kasparov's period in chess is over and Hsu out of computerchess and far away from the gold... - Apart from that, I agree with everyone who's saying that nobody could "prove" a cheating in that show event. But the word of Kasparov has a certain meaning in chess, I would assume and Kasparov said that some events during game two were irregular and IBM didn't clarify things at the instant. That was it. (This still has effects on similar shows in computerchess, because now the players take care that even human intervention couldn't decide the outcome of the match. They simply play for a draw and run away with the money.)
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.