Author: Laurence Chen
Date: 16:56:55 02/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2000 at 02:43:11, blass uri wrote: >On February 16, 2000 at 23:19:43, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: > >>Dear CCC Members, >> >>What we have here is a "failyooooor to communicate". I do sympathize with GM >>Michael Adams because I had food poisoning in the tropics myself. I also feel >>that the delays were too much for the man. Deep Junior was doing over a million >>nps at times and it takes extreme vigilance to avoid tactical traps at these >>levels. I believe that in the interest of having further grandmaster >>participation in computer events or vice-versa it was wise to forfeit the match >>to Adams. > >I do not agree. >I think that the right decision was to play the match later when adams is not >ill. > >I think that the fair decision is that if one player is ill then the game should >be postponed. > >The human should also have a right to postpone the game to another day if the >game does not start on time because of a communication problem because the delay >does not change the level of the computer but may change the level of the human >who is tired later. > >Uri Fischer in his way to become the next World Champion, had to play Petrosian in the final Candidates Match in 1971, and he had a cold. There was no decision to postpone the match. So, when humans play against each other, and one is sick, the one who is ill can only have choices, continue playing or forfeiting the match. In this case, why should be any different for Adams, he should be the one forfeiting not DJ? I guess, this is called reversed logic. Laurence
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.