Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Did GM Michael Adams 2737 honestly lose?

Author: James T. Walker

Date: 07:56:15 06/26/05

Go up one level in this thread


On June 26, 2005 at 10:46:25, Roger D Davis wrote:

>On June 26, 2005 at 10:14:14, K. Burcham wrote:
>
>>
>>At this time, I do not believe that Hydra beat GM Michael Adams, 2737, in match
>>play.
>>At this time I do not believe the results of this match.
>>At this time I believe that someone has an agenda that I am not aware of.
>>At this time I believe that money has influenced the match results.
>>
>>At this time I do not believe that all GM and Super GM that watched and/or have
>>analysed these games are saying: "damn I cannot believe these moves and
>>positions that the machine was able to play, this is truely 2700 Super GM play".
>>
>>Webster: skepticism
>>a : the doctrine that true knowledge or knowledge in a particular area is
>>uncertain
>>b : the method of suspended judgment, systematic doubt, or criticism
>>characteristic of skeptics.
>>
>>http://www.fide.com/ratings/toparc.phtml?cod=77
>>http://www.fide.com/ratings/card.phtml?event=400041
>>
>>kburcham
>
>I think Kramnik-Fritz and Kaspy-Junior were probalby fixed, not necessarily each
>game, but the match result. I don't think Hydra-Adams is.
>
>I think the burden of proof is on the conspiracy theorist. Unfortunately, since
>there is no proof, so the conspiracy theory doesn't stand up.
>
>Roger

Yes, so where is your proof the above mentioned matches were fixed.  The
conspiracy theorist make the same claims after each human/computer match.  It's
easy to sit on the sidelines and kibitz.  The pressure of being the one playing
is quite different.  Have you never been there?



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.