An extremely interesting topic....

[Christopher Conkie]

Are their prizes in this tournament?

If so, what are they?

Trophies.

Last time, I didn't get a trophy but a funny hat.

Don't worry, you won't be getting a hat this time.

[yanquis1972]

on a subject i'm quite sure is related to all this, as much as i admire GCP i fail to see how he is not by any definition a professional programmer...

I'm a professional programmer, and so are probably all participants in the WCCC, including the amateurs. But I'm not a professional games programmer. Maybe people new to the scene have gotten a mistaken impression because of Deep Sjeng's strength, but computer chess is and has always been my hobby, something I do when I get home after work.

I do not make enough off chess programming to pay the professional entry fees in addition to the other costs of participating. I asked the ICGA what I had to do to no longer be considered a professional, because this is clearly a losing proposition. They said I should not enter with the same name or a similar name as something I'm selling.

I did exactly as asked.

This has happened before at least with ChessMaster (The King), Fritz (Quest) and Rybka (Rajlich), so I'm puzzled Hiarcs only suddenly got outraged at the concept.

PS. If they had said I had to give away the program for free, I would probably have done that as well.

one of us has a misunderstanding of what the word 'professional' means, then, & checking up on it as far as i can tell it isn't me:
(from m-w.com)

: participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a professional golfer> b : having a particular profession as a permanent career <a professional soldier> c : engaged in by persons receiving financial return <professional football>

that makes you a professional chess programmer. while i am happy to see sjeng in the tournament & don't have a dog in this fight, as long as you are selling sjeng you're a professional. it doesn't matter if it isn't your livelihood. for example, pro athletes used to (& i'm sure still do in some fields) work jobs in the offseason or on the side; this didn't & doesn't negate their status as professionals in their field. that would be silly.

i hope i don't sound condescending above or by saying that maybe this concept is easier to understand in america because of the way sports work here; you can't legally be an amateur athlete and get -any- financial compensation in any way related to performing. since college sports are huge here there have been a # of scandals because of this.

[Watchman]

one of us has a misunderstanding of what the word 'professional' means, then, & checking up on it as far as i can tell it isn't me:

The real answer is John, it is neither of you...

It is a dumb statement to the "nth degree" and it is even more stupid to think anyone would accept that explanation.

[yanquis1972]

not knowing the details but having respect for the guys work & not knowing him to be dishonest i'm disinclined to see his viewpoint as disingenuous. for him it -is- a hobby, in which he makes some money on the side; i don't doubt that & i don't doubt that he doesn't view himself as a professional...but given a professional/amateur binary by any realistic rule he'd fall in the former category, & that's the frame within which he's working at these events. you're simply one or the other, & unless he does suddenly & in the future offer up sjeng for free download, GCP is a pro chess programmer.

i guess im beginning to see now that hiarcs dropping out is as much to protest GCPs legitimized entry as an amateur as the preposterous rule that allows him to do so. i think perhaps that's the reason they don't take my idea & simply encourage everyone not to pay. it's a shame there's such bad blood between some teams/people here. perhaps this bitterness is exactly what would keep such a plan from being enacted; maybe the programmers dislike each other so much they'd rather pay for their meal & sit at their own table than eat at one table if it meant a free lunch.

[bob]

....going on in the Hiarcs forum regarding the WCCC 2010

Rename your professional chess engine and enter the competition without paying 500 euros....only 25 euros as an amateur chess engine

And when I say I've seen it all in the computer chess world,well then I know that I'm deeply wrong....
Cheers,
Dr.D

How about not charging anything at all?

I cannot believe these fees are making any difference for the overall organization. Don't they have sponsors?

Miguel

It's a stupid idea. It has been a stupid idea for a long time. The original WCCC events _never_ had an entry fee, nor did any ACM event ever held. But the WMCCC events, because there was a "commercial interest" involved, started the entry fee. In fact, in the early WMCCC events, a commercial company could enter multiple copies of the same program if they paid an entry fee for each. Talk about a conflict-of-interest disaster, some early WMCCC events were incredibly corrupt...

[Robert Flesher]

on a subject i'm quite sure is related to all this, as much as i admire GCP i fail to see how he is not by any definition a professional programmer...

I'm a professional programmer, and so are probably all participants in the WCCC, including the amateurs. But I'm not a professional games programmer. Maybe people new to the scene have gotten a mistaken impression because of Deep Sjeng's strength, but computer chess is and has always been my hobby, something I do when I get home after work.

I do not make enough off chess programming to pay the professional entry fees in addition to the other costs of participating. I asked the ICGA what I had to do to no longer be considered a professional, because this is clearly a losing proposition. They said I should not enter with the same name or a similar name as something I'm selling.

I did exactly as asked.

This has happened before at least with ChessMaster (The King), Fritz (Quest) and Rybka (Rajlich), so I'm puzzled Hiarcs only suddenly got outraged at the concept.

PS. If they had said I had to give away the program for free, I would probably have done that as well.

GCP, no need to give it away. Many people, including myself will buy your engine the second it is released. Infact, I'd pay top dollar for a new Sjeng with a setting or personality that played like the old Redshift (most aggressive chess personality ever!)

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

....going on in the Hiarcs forum regarding the WCCC 2010

Rename your professional chess engine and enter the competition without paying 500 euros....only 25 euros as an amateur chess engine

And when I say I've seen it all in the computer chess world,well then I know that I'm deeply wrong....
Cheers,
Dr.D

How about not charging anything at all?

I cannot believe these fees are making any difference for the overall organization. Don't they have sponsors?

Miguel

I've been asking the same questions,but unfortunately no answers has been presented....
Dr.D

[Sven]

....going on in the Hiarcs forum regarding the WCCC 2010

Rename your professional chess engine and enter the competition without paying 500 euros....only 25 euros as an amateur chess engine

And when I say I've seen it all in the computer chess world,well then I know that I'm deeply wrong....
Cheers,
Dr.D

How about not charging anything at all?

I cannot believe these fees are making any difference for the overall organization. Don't they have sponsors?

Miguel

I've been asking the same questions,but unfortunately no answers has been presented....
Dr.D

I vote for equal entry fees for everyone, either zero or non-zero. Charging "professionals" (better term would be "commercials") much higher than others is silly and unfair IMO. If I would sell KnockOut for 5 EUR per copy then my engine is "commercial", so I would have to pay the "professional" entry fee? Unbelievable. In this case I would do the same as GCP, rename my engine into something like "LetThemBiteTheDust" just for that tournament, if that renaming rule were kept up.

Re "professional chess programmer", I think the term is just wrong in most cases. If I sell something that I have produced myself then this might be called my "business" but it is not necessarily my profession. Whether it is or not does mostly depend on what my *main* work or business is, and maybe also on the amount of financial profit drawn from that business. Due to the latter I also think that there is no "black or white", "amateur or professional", since in reality the borders are floating.

Classifying engines as either "commercial" or "not commercial" is o.k. for me, if "commercial" simply means "is being sold for money". But charging "commercials" higher in tournaments is not what I would do.

Sven

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

Re "professional chess programmer", I think the term is just wrong in most cases. If I sell something that I have produced myself then this might be called my "business" but it is not necessarily my profession. Whether it is or not does mostly depend on what my *main* work or business is, and maybe also on the amount of financial profit drawn from that business.

Sven, I'm glad to read this because your interpretation is exactly how I also understand it.

The reactions here suggest to me the word means something completely different in the US. Most people from the US seem convinced it is "very obvious" that I'm a professional, whereas if I would say that I'm a "professional chess programmer" at work then the response would be "what are you doing here then?".

You are a professional only if you can make your living out of it. Somebody who takes wedding pictures during the weekends and asks money for it is not considered a professional photographer here. It seems that in the US he or she would be, though. Similarly, a signer who is selling his own CDs is not a professional artist. He would need a record deal for that.

[Roger Brown]

Re "professional chess programmer", I think the term is just wrong in most cases. If I sell something that I have produced myself then this might be called my "business" but it is not necessarily my profession. Whether it is or not does mostly depend on what my *main* work or business is, and maybe also on the amount of financial profit drawn from that business.

Sven, I'm glad to read this because your interpretation is exactly how I also understand it.

The reactions here suggest to me the word means something completely different in the US. Most people from the US seem convinced it is "very obvious" that I'm a professional, whereas if I would say that I'm a "professional chess programmer" at work then the response would be "what are you doing here then?".

You are a professional only if you can make your living out of it.

Hello Gian-Carlo,

I agree with Sven's interpretation of professional and yes, the rules seem different in the US. My understanding is that if an amateur athlete accepts gear - shoes and outfits - from a sports good company then that jeopardises their amateur status.

I agree that professional should mean what you say above but then, doesn't that now open the door to proving whether or not there are any professional programmers around? Is there anyone that earns their living from computer chess programming? Is that classification valid?

Maybe the focus should shift to the program itself. Programs for sale and those not for sale.

My pitiful two cents.

Later.