Peter Skinner wrote:Rolf wrote:
Peter, this is sad news.
Let me personally help you out of the mess.
1. Like I have sponnsored once the CCC as forum with money, this time I offer 100 US $ as my personal contribution for you to invest it along your plans either for the organization or also some prize money. If others follow me that could become fun.
2. I have a very small condition that should also help you very much. Just get rid of your strict rules for the entry. Let's have it ""Strongest may win, traces of a development should be possible to detect in combination to the author who claims he wanted to enter his baby." Name and address of the guys should be given to be able to send the prize money!!
Just in case and please if many others join the engagement.
All other technical details must be up to you to be decided.
Rolf it seems everyone was _much_ more interested in a wide open affair. Bring the biggest, baddest setup you can get your hands on, and play to win.
It seems people want to see the best engines play on the best hardware available irregardless who is operating it. Whether it is a derivative or not, people want to see it play against everything else.
Maybe that is where this sport is headed...
Peter
Peter, the reason why is so simple and trivial:
it's all about chess. We all have once played OTB chess and we played our relatives and then in simuls even former World Champions. Therefore we are no idiots. Deep in our self we knew that we must lose against a better player. Still, we wanted to see the game that was played between such a master and us. I still keep the record of a game against a World Champion and also against a Grandmaster.
If CC is concerned, it should also be about chess. Even with a weaker entity it's the mystery in chess that you can also win a game. It is beyond me why we have imposters who want to dictate that ONLY some original is allowed to play them. To me they are looking like tuhese figures out of Mme Toussaud, the waxfigures. There they are looking well, but they dont move or speak or play chess.
When I use the word imposter, I must admit that we all here are imposters because our chess compared to real masters is a joke. But it gives fun.
No, please trust me, Peter, although you are so close to Bob, it's not right to reduce computer chess on rules. THe gamescores are the important data that will survive us all.
The hybris of someone like an academic teacher who is teaching classes with holding examinations, that then of course every possible trick must be forbidden. How else could he promote later scientists.
But again, we are talking about chess. Chess is nowhere on this planet a topic for academic studies. For very simplke reasons. Either you can play chess, but you must not have a superior intelligence. The simpleast personalities in our history could play chess like magicians.
By definition someone who always wins and who doesnt use outer help during a game, he cant be called a cheater because he won.
The same with Vas, he won like the great DB2 without outer help. But here you see the double standard. DB2 was allied, and Vas is outsorted for certain people. The injustice cries to heaven!
Nobody has the right to destroy the life of such a good computerchess player!
