Author: James T. Walker
Date: 11:55:30 03/01/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 29, 2000 at 08:54:18, Terry Presgrove wrote: >On February 29, 2000 at 05:46:29, Martin wrote: > >>On February 28, 2000 at 22:06:37, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>On February 28, 2000 at 21:55:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>On February 28, 2000 at 20:30:28, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 28, 2000 at 20:25:29, Derrick Williams wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> At the this week in chess site, a letter is displayed by michael Adams >>>>>>explaining the circumstances surounding the Deep blue Scandal, It appears that >>>>>>Michael Adams is attempting to shift the blame away from himself, on to the >>>>>>victims, which was Clearly Amir Ban and his partner Shay. I believe this only >>>>>>adds insult to injury, Mr. Adams ought to be ashamed of himself. >>>>> >>>>>Here is the "open letter": >>>>>http://www.chesscenter.com/twic/adams.html >>>> >>>>It sounds to me like Adams was simply "caught in the middle of a bad >>>>situation." It doesn't sound (to me) as though he had any real sort of >>>>agenda to cause a problem... I think that the organizers simply had way too >>>>much incompetence to let the event run smoothly... This kind of nonsense was >>>>inevitable... >>> >>>I think you are right, but I think that Mr. Adams now blames Amir and Shay. A >>>typical example of "blaming the victom" if I ever saw one. I don't think Adams >>>is at fault either. But I do fault his derision of Amir, who was (I think) >>>stuck in the middle far worse than anyone else -- especially considering the >>>outcome. >> >>Well, it was Amir and Shay who blamed Mickey shortly after the event. And this >>is certainly not fair either. >> >>Martin > > Perhaps you are rigtht that Adam's received to much early criticism. But the > fact remains he could have played the second game. Mig gave him the opportunity > to bail out and that is exactly what he did. Had it been another GM the offer > would not have been on the table. > It would not surprise me if we do not hear much more on this issue from the DJ > team. There has to be a tremendous amount of pressure on them to let this die. > Except for Dr. Hyatt's strong criticism in the non-commercial arena and one > post by Ed Shroeder of Rebel chidding Mig for making a bad decision I am not > aware of any commercial programmer coming to the DJ team's defense (please > correct me it I'm wrong). It may very well be that in the long scheme of thngs > this is the best course for those envolved in the developement of Chess > software. But I suggest that if it had happened to any one of the others (that > have not spoken) they would have reacted somewhat differently than we have > seen. I understand that the GM's hold all the cards on this issue and the > programmers are to a large degree at their mercy, but there is no gray area in > the fact that KC (Mig) screwed the DJ team and this whole episode has left a > very bad taste in allot of people's mouths. I suspect that this issue will > quickly fade as we draw closer to the next matches and hopefully the end of a > very bad episode in computer chess. > > TP Hello Terry, I agree with you but I tend to judge others relative to my own morals. If I had been presented with the options that Adams was presented with I would have been more fair to the Junior team. In my opinion it was Adams fault that the match could not be played later or the next day not Deep Junior. It was Adams that was trying to play two matches at the same time. If the opponent had been another GM there would never have been any thought given that the opponent would have to forfeit. There is nothing to do now but let it die but I will always remember Adams as the guy who took the "Easy victory" over Deep Junior without ever winning a game. Jim Walker
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.