Author: Christopher Conkie
Date: 11:58:00 06/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hello, Thank you for all your answers, whoever you may be. I thought long and hard about what I wanted to say. I should not like you all to think that my post was antagonisic as it is something that I have a long held and very firm belief in. There fore I will try to answer since I started this, all at once in one post. Lance >Its the best combination of many other things, including the best book Human games have no place in computer chess IMHO. If I want to see a human game I would go and watch humans play. Dann >If the goal of the contest is to try to find the combination that plays the >strongest chess, then it is well achieved by the current format. I think that the world championship should be about who made the best engine only that performed in the competition under equal conditions. >At the end of the contest we literally have no idea which of the programs is >strongest (from the data supplied during the event). What a pity! I totally agree with this statement. It is true, we don't find out and that is why I fear for the future of computer chess. Charles >As far as results being "meaningless", this is not true. The point of it is >not to decide what people should go out and buy for their PC. The point is to >provide a competition that will all researchers in the field to test there >efforts. Ask ChessBase if that is true. Not me. Why do you think they sponsor the event? For fun? >Also, these algorithms are quite applicable to other fields of science. I do >not see why you want to hold back progress in these fields inorder to see >which program is best on the PC at this single point in time. The ICCA ground to a screeching halt in 2003 and has done nothing much since for computer chess. It pains me to say it as a Scotsman is in charge (or at least has a major say in it) >My guess is that you didn't understand the point of the tournament. Believe me, I do. I have my own firmly held beliefs and I have nothing to gain from those beliefs, they are only honest observations. Mike To all of what you say, I say, fair enough but what a pity. No development takes place where people have no morality left and money rules only. "Madhavan" Most of what you say is to me is completely illogical and mostly rude. >Special appearance fees will also be given to the programmer by organisers >ICGA. How do you know this? Show me how you know this. Matthew >That's OK. You have a right to learn nothing and be wrong. True, it's my choice......man :-) Guy >'Equal hardware' events are no longer wanted by the competitors on the whole I don't how you know this and I disagree anyway. Did you ask everyone? Mattheiu >What happen to the program which is program runs faster on a AMD? If the hardware were the same this would not be an issue. Peter >Not every strong program can take advantage of a parallel system Which is why I believe that there should be different classes for different systems. We do after all have such a paralell in human chess tournaments after all. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ To sum up, there seems to be a need for a truly fair World Championship. One in which the conditions are equal and therefore fair. One that is devoid of the commercial considerations of a few, lining their pockets on supposed results of their "manufactured" conditions. This is what I personally would set up. Somewhere where the worth of something is appreciated and not somewhere where results are broadcasted as being "real" when they are anything but real. Next you will all be telling me that the "World" Series take place between baseball teams from all across the world. Only in North America could such a thing like this happen. If you tell yourselves something for long enough I believe that eventually you will believe that you are right. I want you to know that we love you even if you are misguided in your logic and approach to the reward of the many hours that programmers put into their engines. I will agree to differ. Let me know when you change your minds. I know that this is a nonsense and that the true World Champion (whoever that is) will remain a mystery to those that do not think about fairness. It is just as well that we know who has contributed most (secretly you know it too) but that for now there is no proper environment for them to prove it. Regards to you all Have a lovely (if ignorant) weekend Christopher
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.