Author: Mark R. Anderson
Date: 14:01:34 03/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2006 at 09:11:52, Tord Romstad wrote: >Taken from the ChessBase site: > >http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2947 > > The classical World Chess Champion against the world's strongest > computer program: In the WORLD CHESS CHALLENGE (WCC) 2006 classical > chess World Champion Vladimir Kramnik (Russia) will play a match > against the world's leading chess computer program, Deep Fritz > (Germany). > >Calling Fritz "the world's leading chess computer program" is not just >stretching the truth, it's blatantly untrue. I refuse to believe that >ChessBase is unaware of the existence of chess programs stronger than >Fritz. They are lying, plain and simple. > >It is also getting boring to always watch the same programs get the >chance to play against the top GMs. > >Tord Tord, I agree. Speaking of untrue statements, what about the claim of Kramnik being the "Classical Chess World Champion?" In my view, Kramnik was given the chance to play and refused. He's played little lately, due to some health concerns, and when he has, his results have been less than spectacular .... usually about an even score. He's now rated, IIRC, about 7th or 8th in the world. World Chess Champion? No way. Just like we now have Rybka and Fruit, both of which can beat Fritz, and Hiarcs, which is also about even with Fritz. Fritz can no longer claim to be solely best, and now yet another match for Kramnik to draw it in all games .... I feel myself getting sleepy just thinking about it ... (yawn). Based on the logic of Kramnik, if you don't play, then you're not beaten, and then you're still champ. Didn't someone else use that same foolish logic? Perhaps Bobby Fischer? Gee, with this logic, we might have lots of champs! (As if we don't already have enough .....) Mark Anderson
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.