The Fate of Future WCCC's..??
Posted: Sat Jun 13, 2009 2:49 pm
seems to be in the hands of the programmers themselves:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
It's a good idea. 30 voters i make that.Steve B wrote:seems to be in the hands of the programmers themselves:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
Sorry but it isn't. We were polled this year, but then told "it is too late to change it back" even though no one had voted to change it to 8-core-max in the first place. The ICGA will do what it wants, or what it is pressured to do by parties unknown.Steve B wrote:seems to be in the hands of the programmers themselves:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
I know that several voted for the limit. Although last time it was not a formal vote. At the players meeting in Pamplona many favoured the limit or uniform hardware.bob wrote:Sorry but it isn't. We were polled this year, but then told "it is too late to change it back" even though no one had voted to change it to 8-core-max in the first place. The ICGA will do what it wants, or what it is pressured to do by parties unknown.Steve B wrote:seems to be in the hands of the programmers themselves:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
Why do you think it should be unlimited?bob wrote:Sorry but it isn't. We were polled this year, but then told "it is too late to change it back" even though no one had voted to change it to 8-core-max in the first place. The ICGA will do what it wants, or what it is pressured to do by parties unknown.Steve B wrote:seems to be in the hands of the programmers themselves:
http://hiarcs.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2434
Steve
No.Christopher Conkie wrote: Surely an unlimited use of hardware encourages larger hardware and not better search and eval?
Please give us 100 links I would also like to know of those shouting on the forums how many have played in the last 5 years?Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:No.Christopher Conkie wrote: Surely an unlimited use of hardware encourages larger hardware and not better search and eval?
(If you want an explanation why, just look up the 100 other threads about this)
Maybe a few didn't play anymore because they don't like what's happening with the event. Like the 8-core rule.Harvey Williamson wrote:I would also like to know of those shouting on the forums how many have played in the last 5 years?
You sound like you are not a happy customer although you will probably get a vote. I do not see why any reasonable person would object to 5 years. Why should those that do not play get a vote? Surely the event is primarily for the teams that can be bothered to turn up and pay the entry fees.Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:Maybe a few didn't play anymore because they don't like what's happening with the event. Like the 8-core rule.Harvey Williamson wrote:I would also like to know of those shouting on the forums how many have played in the last 5 years?
Organizations which only listen to happy customers usually don't last long.
Well the audience is important, as well as the players. Delicate balance. If the players don't like the rules, they won't play, and if the audience don't like the rules they won't follow the tournament. Maybe some players won't care about that, but I do believe that is what the WCCC is all about - putting on a show for the chess community. So in a way the people shouting on the forums' opinions are the most valuable of all.Harvey Williamson wrote:Please give us 100 links I would also like to know of those shouting on the forums how many have played in the last 5 years?Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:No.Christopher Conkie wrote: Surely an unlimited use of hardware encourages larger hardware and not better search and eval?
(If you want an explanation why, just look up the 100 other threads about this)