Laskos wrote:Then one had in such luck-prone sport as soccer FC Barcelona winning everything for a long period of time, leading in all rating lists (serious ones, by FIFA), Champions League died?
I don't remember FC Barcelona winning the last edition of the Champions League.
I'm wondering what point you are trying to make. There are rating lists to determine who is best. This seems to work just fine in chess, tennis, computer chess. Now there are also tournaments where the "best player" usually has the best chances, but often does not win. That's just fine as well.
A world championship is just a tournament. It is not a rating list.
Laskos wrote:Then one had in such luck-prone sport as soccer FC Barcelona winning everything for a long period of time, leading in all rating lists (serious ones, by FIFA), Champions League died?
I don't remember FC Barcelona winning the last edition of the Champions League.
I was several years ago.
Now there are also tournaments where the "best player" usually has the best chances, but often does not win. That's just fine as well.
Not fine if it is a complete lottery. Maybe fine for folks like gamblers and betters, but to show off to unknowledgeable public your title implying that there was more than lottery (and a rigged one, as the best did not even participate) is a farce.
A world championship is just a tournament. It is not a rating list.
People might make analogies with Usain Bolt or Messi when buying it.
ICGA World Championship is dead because computer chess as a public sport event is dead. There is no public interest anymore in computer chess events and the interest will never return again. There is no money to earn. There are no sponsors. World Champion in computer chess? Who cares beside a few morons. Noone.
Laskos wrote:Sure, 100 meters sprint is dead because of Usain Bolt.
The difference that you are not willing to acknowledge is that these 100m athletes are sportsmen, willing to give there best and not caring if that means they sometimes lose. 100m sprint would also not be dead if if there were 5 people usually performing within 0.001 sec from each other, because it became a 'complete lottery'.
As soon as 'too little chance to win' would be a reason not to compete, making the outcome more predictable by increasing the number of games makes the problem an order of magnitude worse. Because you can only appease one participant that way, and all others will be even more determined not to enter.
Is that what you consider a good World Championship? Only Houdini participating, and perhaps Fairy-Max, because I am there anyway?
Ralph Stoesser wrote:ICGA World Championship is dead because computer chess as a public sport event is dead. There is no public interest anymore in computer chess events and the interest will never return again. There is no money to earn. There are no sponsors. World Champion in computer chess? Who cares beside a few morons. Noone.
Much of that is true, except that it doesn't explain why commercial programs still want to flash the title on their products. There is no direct money or public interest in the event, but apparently still some money to be made by claiming you have the title. Even if it isn't true...
Of course as a participant, I don't really care. I am not there for the money, and I am not there for the crowds. I am there to win!
The ICGA has no authority (except the faith placed in it by the individual) to declare a "World Champion" of anything. It does have the authority to declare an ICGA "World Champion" of something. Of course, that is still only worth the value individuals attach to it.
Titles are like paper money, they only possess value based upon belief.
If you want one such example, consider the name of International Computer Games Association. That is a pretty broad and rather presumptuous title. I doubt Starcraft II players, or BF4 players, or LoL players, etc., recognize its authority. And what outside party gave permission for the ICCA to change its title to ICGA? Were EA, EPIC, Microsoft, Bethesda, Sony, or Nintendo consulted? Did every nation state in the world sign off on validity of the ICGA? If they did not sign off on it, is the ICGA recognized by that nation state? And how is it even allowed to call itself such?
It is a construct of academia (and thus of man), period.
Last edited by jhellis3 on Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
Harvey Williamson wrote:Leagues last months. World Championships and Olympic games etc tend to last a couple of weeks.
Harvey,
Every self respecting sport has a body that is recognized and endorsed by the vast majority of sportsmen / women. What once was since 2011 is no longer. Whatever the reason you have to act.
You keep making that pronouncement - the ICGA is no longer recognized.
Selective reading on your end, see the red above.
There is no reason to involve the Rybka controversy into the discussion. Forget about Rybka, it is what it is and doing nothing won't solve the above problem, the last 2½ year has proven that.
You will remember the days the WCCC and WMCCC were the yearly highlight, the magazins and CC fora exploded. That popularity halted (quite roughly) exactly when?
Circa 1997, to be exact. I assume you realize the significance of that date? Never was the same after that. Suddenly no TV crews showed up, no vendors kicked in tens of thousands of dollars or provided special hardware, etc.
You are not reading again. The WCCC's from 1998-2010 were just fine regarding popularity.
Now look up the number of postings of the last WCCC (Japan) here, there are hardly any.
You don't have to be a prophet to predict how this will end, if things already are not irreversable in the meantime by the 2½ year lack of action from David. As if doing nothing ever solved a problem.
Quite often, doing NOTHING is much better than doing something WRONG.
Yeah, do nothing about vice-world-champion LOOP (Amsterdam 2007), do nothing about Thinker, do not investgate Fritz 14.
Yeah... that kind of sweeping things under the carpet by silencing it.
I told you time and time again there will be no LOOP verdict. You promised there would be. Tell me your progress.
Sorry, but wrong. WC's since 1997 or so have fallen off drastically, both participation, publicity, sponsorships, etc. In the 80's and 90's we had live TV crews present every round, etc. My wife surprised me with a scrapbook in early 1984, the year after we won our first WCCC in New York in 1983. She had articles from all sorts of well-known publications. New York Times. Computer World. Wall Street Journal. Byte magazine. Chess Life and Review, ACM SigArt, this thing was about 3" thick. Had no idea there had been that kind of publicity until our USM publicity department started sending her all sorts of stuff. Today? Nada. Discussions on CCC or r.g.c.c are not the problem. It is the lack of interest everywhere else that forms the basis of the problem.
Harvey Williamson wrote:Leagues last months. World Championships and Olympic games etc tend to last a couple of weeks.
Harvey,
Every self respecting sport has a body that is recognized and endorsed by the vast majority of sportsmen / women. What once was since 2011 is no longer. Whatever the reason you have to act.
You keep making that pronouncement - the ICGA is no longer recognized.
Selective reading on your end, see the red above.
There is no reason to involve the Rybka controversy into the discussion. Forget about Rybka, it is what it is and doing nothing won't solve the above problem, the last 2½ year has proven that.
You will remember the days the WCCC and WMCCC were the yearly highlight, the magazins and CC fora exploded. That popularity halted (quite roughly) exactly when?
Circa 1997, to be exact. I assume you realize the significance of that date? Never was the same after that. Suddenly no TV crews showed up, no vendors kicked in tens of thousands of dollars or provided special hardware, etc.
You are not reading again. The WCCC's from 1998-2010 were just fine regarding popularity.
Now look up the number of postings of the last WCCC (Japan) here, there are hardly any.
You don't have to be a prophet to predict how this will end, if things already are not irreversable in the meantime by the 2½ year lack of action from David. As if doing nothing ever solved a problem.
Quite often, doing NOTHING is much better than doing something WRONG.
Yeah, do nothing about vice-world-champion LOOP (Amsterdam 2007), do nothing about Thinker, do not investgate Fritz 14.
Yeah... that kind of sweeping things under the carpet by silencing it.
I told you time and time again there will be no LOOP verdict. You promised there would be. Tell me your progress.
Sorry, but wrong. WC's since 1997 or so have fallen off drastically, both participation, publicity, sponsorships, etc. In the 80's and 90's we had live TV crews present every round, etc. My wife surprised me with a scrapbook in early 1984, the year after we won our first WCCC in New York in 1983. She had articles from all sorts of well-known publications. New York Times. Computer World. Wall Street Journal. Byte magazine. Chess Life and Review, ACM SigArt, this thing was about 3" thick. Had no idea there had been that kind of publicity until our USM publicity department started sending her all sorts of stuff. Today? Nada. Discussions on CCC or r.g.c.c are not the problem. It is the lack of interest everywhere else that forms the basis of the problem.
That is the whole point. If I guy with a computer in Sweden can do it (even on an age in which print media is becoming obsolete), how on earth an Institution cannot? We can debate forever what the reasons are, but at the end of the day, one is succeeding and the other is not.
Harvey Williamson wrote:Leagues last months. World Championships and Olympic games etc tend to last a couple of weeks.
Harvey,
Every self respecting sport has a body that is recognized and endorsed by the vast majority of sportsmen / women. What once was since 2011 is no longer. Whatever the reason you have to act.
You keep making that pronouncement - the ICGA is no longer recognized.
Selective reading on your end, see the red above.
There is no reason to involve the Rybka controversy into the discussion. Forget about Rybka, it is what it is and doing nothing won't solve the above problem, the last 2½ year has proven that.
You will remember the days the WCCC and WMCCC were the yearly highlight, the magazins and CC fora exploded. That popularity halted (quite roughly) exactly when?
Circa 1997, to be exact. I assume you realize the significance of that date? Never was the same after that. Suddenly no TV crews showed up, no vendors kicked in tens of thousands of dollars or provided special hardware, etc.
You are not reading again. The WCCC's from 1998-2010 were just fine regarding popularity.
Now look up the number of postings of the last WCCC (Japan) here, there are hardly any.
You don't have to be a prophet to predict how this will end, if things already are not irreversable in the meantime by the 2½ year lack of action from David. As if doing nothing ever solved a problem.
Quite often, doing NOTHING is much better than doing something WRONG.
Yeah, do nothing about vice-world-champion LOOP (Amsterdam 2007), do nothing about Thinker, do not investgate Fritz 14.
Yeah... that kind of sweeping things under the carpet by silencing it.
I told you time and time again there will be no LOOP verdict. You promised there would be. Tell me your progress.
Sorry, but wrong. WC's since 1997 or so have fallen off drastically, both participation, publicity, sponsorships, etc. In the 80's and 90's we had live TV crews present every round, etc. My wife surprised me with a scrapbook in early 1984, the year after we won our first WCCC in New York in 1983. She had articles from all sorts of well-known publications. New York Times. Computer World. Wall Street Journal. Byte magazine. Chess Life and Review, ACM SigArt, this thing was about 3" thick. Had no idea there had been that kind of publicity until our USM publicity department started sending her all sorts of stuff. Today? Nada. Discussions on CCC or r.g.c.c are not the problem. It is the lack of interest everywhere else that forms the basis of the problem.
That is the whole point. If I guy with a computer in Sweden can do it (even on an age in which print media is becoming obsolete), how on earth an Institution cannot? We can debate forever what the reasons are, but at the end of the day, one is succeeding and the other is not.
Miguel
That is NOT the New York Times. That's a blog.
Doesn't even have the facts correct since Rybka didn't win the last 4 WCCC events even...
This is the typical ICGA bashing nonsense. I gave you examples of the kind of publicity we got for ONE SINGLE 4 day tournament. Enough DIFFERENT sources to produce a scrapbook over 3" thick. And you offer up this kind of nonsense as to what the ICGA doesn't get today? There is no comparison between today and pre-1997.
