Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 11:53:12 01/18/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 18, 2006 at 13:53:27, Chrilly Donninger wrote: >On January 18, 2006 at 06:42:50, Sune Larsson wrote: > >>From an article on the CB-site: >> >>Who is the strongest player in the world right now? Perhaps it is still >>Kasparov, despite having recently left the stage? >> >>"There is no such a thing as the “stronger player”. No one understands chess as >>it is, there is simply a will to reach the highest possible result. Actually, >>Kasparov doesn’t understand anything in chess. And personally I don’t give a >>damn what he is occupied with, he only exists on tournament score sheets. His >>other endeavors do not interest me." >> >>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2874 >> >>/S >Amateur is a Latin word and means "Lover". Only an amateur loves his >occupation/hobby. For a professional its work like any other work. Well, I know >a lot of jobs, which are worse than computer-chess programming or chess-playing. >But its nevertheless work. E.g. I have stopped chess playing, when I become >computer-chess-professional. After watching all the day engine-matches, there is >one thing I am not interested in the evening: Chess. >I think Moro is also right, that there is no relation in chess between effort >and money. The Hydra chess expert GM Lutz plays on the first board of the German >top team "Porz". He earns the same amount than a top player in the local >football team. The slight difference: The soccer team plays in the lowest league >of the Austrian competition. Nobody would consider these players as >professional. They just get some small extra money to their normal job. > >Thats also one problem we have in the Hydra team. Adams could win 25.000$ if he >wins a game for Hydra. But this is in modern sports no money. Beckham gets the >same for kicking one corner. Money is the measure of importance in this world. >Something is by definition important, if a lot of money is involved. > >Moro is also right, that chess is a boring game. Actually computer chess is even >more boring. It is fascinating like watching paint dry. > >Chrilly When HYDRA plays in Spain against human GM from former SU who take it more or less seriously for still enough money compared to the general level in those regions, CC is much fun. However when a program like RYBKA appears and gets the attention, CC isnt really big fun... HYDRA - this is the same trick as with DB. Nobody knows the actual strength. Nobody knows the opening books and nobody, even God or Allah, could win some show match with 5 or 6 games. Simply because modern human chess is a game with preparation on the opponent. It's as if I should play a match against my washing machine. I wouldnt even know that it could play chess. How could I prepare myself? Ok, I play for a draw and take the money. That is the best I could do. The hardware solution for HYDRA is simply too boring. And now it's clear that even its programmer has enough of it. He's also only interested in some money... Chess is an art. And if you lose it because you prefer to collect money then life as such becomes boring. Watching the growth of money is boring. Next step is nihilism with the only highlight - suicide. This is what happens if you lose the art of chess and you begin to *calculate* how long it took you to understand the meaning of an opening or the advantages of the B pair, and how much money you could have made in the meantime. Life as such doesnt pay either. In the end you lie in that coffin all alone without your wealth, even without dog and wife. Moral: Dont underestimate the value of an art like chess, of any other art too. It can make you see if youre blind and it makes you fly even if you must sit in your wheelchair. It's this magic that makes life so worthwhile.
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.