Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
Saran Maitreiwech
I've noticed that Virtual Chess is a very strong program. Wonder why
it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
candidates.
JGrif10395
maybe because it is not on the agenda
Patrick McDonald
Good question, Saran. I also wonder why. Any chance that our local rgcc
experts could answer this one?
Patrick McDonald
Ingo Althoefer
In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include Virtual
Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
But this is not true. Fritz is programmed by Frans Morsch and Mathias Feist.
Virtual Chess is by Jean Christophe Weill and Francois Baudot.
These programming teams are completely disjoint. Ingo Althoefer.
mclane
alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de (Ingo Althoefer) wrote:
WHAAAAAAAAAAAT ??????
No joke Ingo ?!?
Unbelievable. Again one strange side effect of the ssdf-list that
overwrites ANY error-margin !! :-)
Uff.
I have never heard about that, otherwise I would have instantly CRIED
OUT: it is Chessica that is a clone of Fritz, not Virtual-Chess.
I still can't believe this..
Hello ssdf-folks .... can you hear us ?!
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
: >>
: >> I've noticed that Virtual Chess is a very strong program. Wonder why
: >> it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
: >> candidates.
: >
: >Good question, Saran. I also wonder why. Any chance that our local rgcc
: >experts could answer this one?
: >
: > Patrick McDonald
: Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include Virtual
: Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
: But this is not true. Fritz is programmed by Frans Morsch and Mathias Feist.
: Virtual Chess is by Jean Christophe Weill and Francois Baudot.
: These programming teams are completely disjoint. Ingo Althoefer.
The SSDF knows very well that Virtual Chess is not a variation of Fritz. I
don't understand where you could have heard that. The reason that Virtual
Chess has still not been tested by the SSDF is simply that they do not have
the recources to test every new program. They believe (perhaps incorrectly)
that Virtual Chess is not quite as strong as the very best programs, and
therefore haven't started testing it yet.
Also, the SSDF (of course) need a few copies of the program to do the testing.
Perhaps the Virtual Chess team hasn't sent the SSDF any copies of their
program? (This was the reason that Fritz 3 and Fritz 4 appeared so late on
the rating list --- ChessBase didn't send any copies to the SSDF.)
Tord
Lonnie Cook
Hmmm, Maybe if this is true they're getting Chessica which basically is the same as
fritz as far as a chess engine goes between getting mixed up with VC which is a
totally different product.
같같같
Lonnie
3 kinds of people: those
who can count & those
who can't.
Eric Hallsworth
In article <5air10$8...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, Tord Kallqvist Romstad
<tor...@ifi.uio.no> writes
>Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
>
>: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
>: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
>: >>
>: >> I've noticed that Virtual Chess is a very strong program. Wonder why
>: >> it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
>: >> candidates.
>: >
>: >Good question, Saran. I also wonder why. Any chance that our local rgcc
>: >experts could answer this one?
>: >
>: > Patrick McDonald
>
>: Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include Virtual
>: Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
>: But this is not true. Fritz is programmed by Frans Morsch and Mathias Feist.
>: Virtual Chess is by Jean Christophe Weill and Francois Baudot.
>: These programming teams are completely disjoint. Ingo Althoefer.
>
>The SSDF knows very well that Virtual Chess is not a variation of Fritz. I
>don't understand where you could have heard that. The reason that Virtual
>Chess has still not been tested by the SSDF is simply that they do not have
>the recources to test every new program.
>They believe (perhaps incorrectly)
>that Virtual Chess is not quite as strong as the very best programs, and
>therefore haven't started testing it yet.
>
I don't think this can be the full reason as both Comet32 and Gandalf2.1
have made their appearances recently, and both are certainly some way
behind Virtual Chess. Also Rebel Decade has been heavily tested, though
it was known before work commenced that it is not intended to be as
strong as the full Rebel version (Rebel7 at that time).
>Also, the SSDF (of course) need a few copies of the program to do the testing.
>Perhaps the Virtual Chess team hasn't sent the SSDF any copies of their
>program? (This was the reason that Fritz 3 and Fritz 4 appeared so late on
>the rating list --- ChessBase didn't send any copies to the SSDF.)
>
>Tord
--
Best wishes,
Eric Hallsworth, Computer Chess Magazine, The Red House,
46 High Street, Wilburton, Cambs CB6 3RA
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
Eric Hallsworth (er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: In article <5air10$8...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, Tord Kallqvist Romstad
You are right, it is probably not the _full_ reason, but it is certainly
part of the reason. SSDF can't buy every new program that appears on the
market, and they can only test a program if the programmer gives them a
copy for free, or if some of their testers buy the program themselves.
Sten Suurballe, the Gandalf programmer, is a member of SSDF himself, and
I am quite certain he has given the SSDF a few copies. Rebel Decade is
a free program, and the version of Comet32 tested is (I think) shareware.
That is, the SSDF has been able to get these three programs without great
expenses.
Tord
Thoralf Karlsson
In article <32caa819...@news.inet.co.th>, vir...@mozart.inet.co.th
says...
>
>I've noticed that Virtual Chess is a very strong program. Wonder why
>it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
>candidates.
SSDF hasn't the resources to play with all the available chess programs,
but Virtual Chess is one which we have wished to test. The reason why we
haven't played with it is that we only have a demo version. We have tried
to get (free) copies of Virtual Chess, but haven't succeeded. The
likelihood for a program to appear in our rating list increases
significantly if the programmer sends us copies of his new program.
May 19 1996 I sent the following email to both Jean-Christophe Weill and
Marc-Francois Baudot (the programmers of Virtual Chess):
Hi!
For some time The Swedish Computer Chess Association has had a wish to
test Virtual Chess and include it in our rating list. So far it hasn't
been possible for us to get any CDROMs for this purpose from the main
dealer in Sweden. We only have a Demo-version.
Would you like to see your program Virtual Chess in the Swedish rating
list? If so, could you send us some CDROMs with your latest and best
commercially available version of Virtual Chess?
From the LCT II-test you get the impression that Virtual Chess for Win95
is clearly stronger than Virtua Chess 1.02 for DOS. Do they contain
different chess engines? Is Virtual Chess for Win95 in your opinion the
strongest version?
Is it possible to use Donningers AUTO232 for automatic testing of Virtual
Chess? (I guess not)
I have read about your good results in Harvard Cup and in the
Aubervilliers tournament. Do you have more recent successes?
We would be glad for any number of CDROMs with Virtual Chess. Of course,
with more copies the testing goes faster.
If you decide to provide us with (free) copies, please send them to:
Goran Grottling
Diabasv. 3
S-437 32 Lindome
Sweden
Best regards
Thoralf Karlsson
(end of letter)
So far I haven't heard anything from them.
Thoralf Karlsson
SSDF
Thoralf Karlsson
In article <5ag90f$9...@fsuj19.rz.uni-jena.de>,
alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de says...
>
>
>In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
>Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>>Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
>>>
>>> it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
>>> candidates.
>>
>>experts could answer this one?
>>
>> Patrick McDonald
>
>Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include
Virtual
>Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
I don't know from where you have got this information. It's wrong. You
must have mixed Virtual Chess with Chessica.
In another letter I have explained why we haven't played with Virtual
Chess.
Thoralf Karlsson
SSDF
Thoralf Karlsson
In article <E3EtK...@news.prima.ruhr.de>, mcl...@prima.ruhr.de says...
>
>alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de (Ingo Althoefer) wrote:
>>Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include
Virtual
>>Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
>overwrites ANY error-margin !! :-)
>
There is no reason to believe it, because it's not true. Of course SSDF
knows the difference between Fritz, Chessica and Virtual Chess.
In another letter I have explained why we haven't played with Virtual
Chess (yet).
Thoralf Karlsson
SSDF
mclane
lonni...@riconnect.com (Lonnie Cook) wrote:
>On 3 Jan 1997 12:37:04 +0100, tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist Romstad) wrote:
>>Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
>>
>>: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
>>: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>>: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
>>
>>The SSDF knows very well that Virtual Chess is not a variation of Fritz. I
>>don't understand where you could have heard that. The reason that Virtual
>>Chess has still not been tested by the SSDF is simply that they do not have
>>the recources to test every new program. They believe (perhaps incorrectly)
>>that Virtual Chess is not quite as strong as the very best programs, and
>>therefore haven't started testing it yet.
>>
AGAIN: If I know before I try to prove .... this is called PREJUDICE
!!!
If they KNOW before, they always prove what they WANTED to prove.
The observer influences the experiment / event he observers/studys.
So: they do not only wishful thinking but wishfull changing of
reality.
This way a good program will never show its strength if THEY think it
is a weak program.
This was / is one main critics I still have .
>>Also, the SSDF (of course) need a few copies of the program to do the testing.
>>Perhaps the Virtual Chess team hasn't sent the SSDF any copies of their
>>program? (This was the reason that Fritz 3 and Fritz 4 appeared so late on
>>the rating list --- ChessBase didn't send any copies to the SSDF.)
This I would understand.
mclane
Eric Hallsworth <er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <5air10$8...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, Tord Kallqvist Romstad
><tor...@ifi.uio.no> writes
>>Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
>>
>>: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
>>: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>>: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
>>: >>
>>: >> I've noticed that Virtual Chess is a very strong program. Wonder why
>>: >> it's not mentioned much. And why we can't see it included in SSDF's
>>: >> candidates.
>>: >
>>: >Good question, Saran. I also wonder why. Any chance that our local rgcc
>>: >experts could answer this one?
>>: >
>>: > Patrick McDonald
>>
>>: Some times ago the SSDF established their decision not to include Virtual
>>: Chess by the argument that Virtual Chess was only a variation of Fritz.
>>: But this is not true. Fritz is programmed by Frans Morsch and Mathias Feist.
>>: Virtual Chess is by Jean Christophe Weill and Francois Baudot.
>>: These programming teams are completely disjoint. Ingo Althoefer.
>>
>>The SSDF knows very well that Virtual Chess is not a variation of Fritz. I
>>don't understand where you could have heard that. The reason that Virtual
>>Chess has still not been tested by the SSDF is simply that they do not have
>>the recources to test every new program.
>>They believe (perhaps incorrectly)
>>that Virtual Chess is not quite as strong as the very best programs, and
>>therefore haven't started testing it yet.
>>
>I don't think this can be the full reason as both Comet32 and Gandalf2.1
>have made their appearances recently, and both are certainly some way
>behind Virtual Chess. Also Rebel Decade has been heavily tested, though
>it was known before work commenced that it is not intended to be as
>strong as the full Rebel version (Rebel7 at that time).
>>Also, the SSDF (of course) need a few copies of the program to do the testing.
>>Perhaps the Virtual Chess team hasn't sent the SSDF any copies of their
>>program? (This was the reason that Fritz 3 and Fritz 4 appeared so late on
>>the rating list --- ChessBase didn't send any copies to the SSDF.)
>>
>>Tord
>--
>Best wishes,
>Eric Hallsworth, Computer Chess Magazine, The Red House,
>46 High Street, Wilburton, Cambs CB6 3RA
Eric - you must do the job !! We do an alternative list where we all
test the programs the ssdf-misses and you are the MASTER of this list.
We sent you the pgn-files or games in a zip-file, and you collect and
rate them for your list !
I'll trust you. You maybe us. For us (testers) the games are just
garbage that is a result of our work. We could recycle our
game-output-"garbage" to england.
Do you want to collect our hiarcs and virtual-chess games and include
them into your list ?!
That would be a pleasure for us.
Eric ? Can you hear me ? What do you think ?!
mclane
tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist Romstad) wrote:
>Eric Hallsworth (er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk) wrote:
>: In article <5air10$8...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, Tord Kallqvist Romstad
>: <tor...@ifi.uio.no> writes
>: >Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
>: >
>: >: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
>: >: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
>: >: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
>: >: >>
>You are right, it is probably not the _full_ reason, but it is certainly
>part of the reason. SSDF can't buy every new program that appears on the
>market, and they can only test a program if the programmer gives them a
>copy for free, or if some of their testers buy the program themselves.
>Sten Suurballe, the Gandalf programmer, is a member of SSDF himself, and
>I am quite certain he has given the SSDF a few copies. Rebel Decade is
>a free program, and the version of Comet32 tested is (I think) shareware.
>That is, the SSDF has been able to get these three programs without great
>expenses.
Here in germany we have all the programs that are not reachable in
sweden. Also we have autoplayers and we produce games.
Do you want our games. Or is this against the definition of the SSDF
as a swedish rating list ?!
If you don't want our games, no problem.
I only buy my chess programs ONCE therefore I cannot send my beloved
programs like Virtual-Chess to sweden.
But I will try to convince the people arround to send units ...
>Tord
Tord Kallqvist Romstad
mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
: tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist Romstad) wrote:
: >Eric Hallsworth (er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: >: In article <5air10$8...@gyda.ifi.uio.no>, Tord Kallqvist Romstad
: >: <tor...@ifi.uio.no> writes
: >: >Ingo Althoefer (alth...@mipool.uni-jena.de) wrote:
: >: >
: >: >: In article <32CB8E...@mpx.com.au>,
: >: >: Patrick McDonald <pat...@mpx.com.au> wrote:
: >: >: >Saran Maitreiwech wrote:
: >: >: >>
: >You are right, it is probably not the _full_ reason, but it is certainly
: >part of the reason. SSDF can't buy every new program that appears on the
: >market, and they can only test a program if the programmer gives them a
: >copy for free, or if some of their testers buy the program themselves.
: >Sten Suurballe, the Gandalf programmer, is a member of SSDF himself, and
: >I am quite certain he has given the SSDF a few copies. Rebel Decade is
: >a free program, and the version of Comet32 tested is (I think) shareware.
: >That is, the SSDF has been able to get these three programs without great
: >expenses.
: Here in germany we have all the programs that are not reachable in
: sweden. Also we have autoplayers and we produce games.
: Do you want our games. Or is this against the definition of the SSDF
: as a swedish rating list ?!
Unfortunately, yes. If you want to do any testplay for the SSDF, you have
to be a member.
: If you don't want our games, no problem.
Robert Hyatt
Jean-Christophe Weill (inc...@calva.net) wrote:
: Thoralf Karlsson wrote:
: > May 19 1996 I sent the following email to both Jean-Christophe Weill
: > and Marc-Francois Baudot (the programmers of Virtual Chess):
: Yes, we have received this letter. (At least me, and I think
: I sent a copy to Marc-François and our publisher)
: So, probably, we are not in the SSDF list because we do not want
: to be there ! Basically, Virtual Chess is designed in the last year in
: order to be a good opposition againt human. We found that this is not
: exactly the same thing as being a good opposition against computer...
: And since, Computer Chess program are most of the time buyed to
: be played against human, we do not see any reason not to continue
: our way... BTW, Virtual Chess does not play so badly against programs...
: But being ahead of the SSDF list is not our main goal.
: That is my point of view and certainly it is why I did not push
: the others to send a copy to SSDF and also because with Marc-François,
: we always want to send the forthcoming (and of course much better)
: version...
: Jean-Christophe Weill
Good point. I've mentioned this many times as well.... two different
goals, one to beat computers, one to beat humans. I'm having more fun
with the "beating humans" goal, although I do pay attention to the "other"
one from time to time. :)
Bob
Jean-Christophe Weill
Mark Schreiber
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote:
: Jean-Christophe Weill (inc...@calva.net) wrote:
: : Basically, Virtual Chess is designed in the last year in
: : order to be a good opposition againt human. We found that this is not
: : exactly the same thing as being a good opposition against computer...
: : And since, Computer Chess program are most of the time buyed to
: : be played against human, we do not see any reason not to continue
: : our way... BTW, Virtual Chess does not play so badly against programs...
: goals, one to beat computers, one to beat humans. I'm having more fun
: with the "beating humans" goal, although I do pay attention to the "other"
: one from time to time. :)
So, will your program play at AEGON?
At AEGON computers only play humans.
Eric Hallsworth
In article <E3K00...@news.prima.ruhr.de>, mclane
<mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> writes
day - nor do I spend too much time on it.... there's so much else in
life worth doing! But I will always reply if and when I can.
I would be glad to receive your results, and more than happy to get
Virtua[l] Chess onto my Rating List. I think the only stipulation would
have to be that I would want *all* the results for every program, even
if you think they may not be of interest. There is *no* selection at
this end, every independent result goes into the Ratings whether the
score pleases me privately/commercially or not!
I like copies of the game scores so that I can play over one or two
games if there is a 'weird' result, and make sure the moves represent
their programs correctly! And, as you know, time controls are from 60/60
or slower.
I have put yours and Dirk's early Hiarcs5 results into my Ratings, and
the top 4 on Pentiums right now are:
Rebel8 2532 Elo from 864 games
Genius5 2532 Elo from 103 games
Hiarcs5 2516 Elo from 150 games
MChessPro6 2515 Elo from 470 games
I mention the no. of games as the Genius5 and Hiarcs5 ratings are based
on low samples as yet, and could change by + or - 40 Elo quite easily as
more scores come in. The Rebel8 and MCP6 ratings are stabilising now and
should be within 15 or 20 Elo of their computer-v-computer truth.
Robert Hyatt
Mark Schreiber (msch...@interactive.net) wrote:
No idea. If someone volunteers to operate Crafty, I'll certainly provide
the machine if necessary. However, I'm working on the real "rating" issue
already, trying to get Crafty a "true" rating.
Any volunteers??
Komputer Korner
Eric Hallsworth wrote:
>
>
> I have put yours and Dirk's early Hiarcs5 results into my Ratings, and
> the top 4 on Pentiums right now are:
>
> Rebel8 2532 Elo from 864 games
> Genius5 2532 Elo from 103 games
> Hiarcs5 2516 Elo from 150 games
> MChessPro6 2515 Elo from 470 games
>
> I mention the no. of games as the Genius5 and Hiarcs5 ratings are based
> on low samples as yet, and could change by + or - 40 Elo quite easily as
> more scores come in. The Rebel8 and MCP6 ratings are stabilising now and
> should be within 15 or 20 Elo of their computer-v-computer truth.
>
> --
> Best wishes,
> Eric Hallsworth, Computer Chess Magazine, The Red House,
> 46 High Street, Wilburton, Cambs CB6 3RA
Hi Eric,
What is the speed of the Pentiums or if these are adjusted, what is
the base speed?
--
Komputer Korner
The komputer that kouldn't keep a password safe from
prying eyes, kouldn't kompute the square root of 36^n,
kouldn't find the real motive in ChessBase and missed
the real learning feature of Nimzo.
mclane
tor...@ifi.uio.no (Tord Kallqvist Romstad) wrote:
>: Do you want our games. Or is this against the definition of the SSDF
>: as a swedish rating list ?!
>Unfortunately, yes. If you want to do any testplay for the SSDF, you have
>to be a member.
Hm. The same was told me by the ICCA. If you want to participate
championships, you have to be a member.
But although I was a member, they never told me WHY or WHO made the
decision about JAKARTA. And nobody answered my question IF THIS
DECISION WILL HAVE CONSEQUENCES.
They want you to pay, and then they don't ask you for anything, they
do what they want. No- I don't want to be a MEMBER again.
E R I C ?! Are you there ?!
Would you take the games of the german testers or do we have to be
members or british ?!
mclane
hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
>Any volunteers??
I think it will be no problem to ask Cock de Gorter if he can manage
that Crafty plays at AEGON-tournament in DEN HAAG.
It would be a pleasure for us to see how Crafty plays vs. strong
Grandmasters !! Please keep an eye on participating Den Haag AEGON !!!
Because Crafty saves main-lines we will be able to replay the whole
game and make a report how the grandmaster felt , and put both crafty
and grandmasters comments about the game in relation !!
mclane
Eric Hallsworth <er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>Eric - you must do the job !! We do an alternative list where we all
>>test the programs the ssdf-misses and you are the MASTER of this list.
>>We sent you the pgn-files or games in a zip-file, and you collect and
>>rate them for your list !
>>
>>I'll trust you. You maybe us. For us (testers) the games are just
>>garbage that is a result of our work. We could recycle our
>>game-output-"garbage" to england.
>>
>>Do you want to collect our hiarcs and virtual-chess games and include
>>them into your list ?!
>>
>>That would be a pleasure for us.
>>
>>Eric ? Can you hear me ? What do you think ?!
>>
>Yes, I can still hear you Thorsten! I don't log onto the Internet every
>day - nor do I spend too much time on it.... there's so much else in
>life worth doing! But I will always reply if and when I can.
Very nice - thanks. I thought you are the next who will leave us alone
here...
>I would be glad to receive your results, and more than happy to get
>Virtua[l] Chess onto my Rating List. I think the only stipulation would
>have to be that I would want *all* the results for every program, even
>if you think they may not be of interest. There is *no* selection at
>this end, every independent result goes into the Ratings whether the
>score pleases me privately/commercially or not!
Brilliant. I will instantly start and send you all the games I play
with Virtual Chess WIN95 and Hiarcs5 against famous other programs
like Rebel8, Mchess6 and Fritz4.01.
I will send you notations and (hopefully) both game-files (if the
autoplayer saves both: sometimes it saves ony the game-file of one
machine due to technical problems or imcompatible reasons)
and because I have found out HIARCS5 need 40/120 time-control
(Always and always Mark seems to TUNE his program onto 40/120 level!),
I will send you unbelievable games between Hiarcs5 and strongest chess
programs.
It is marvellous to see Hiarcs5 fight the others into death, and
hiarcs5 wins almost any game. Therefore I know give the following
statement: If you choose same hardware and 40/120 hiarcs5 kills any
chess program so far. Hiarcs will overtake Rebel8 in any fair list.
Wait and see if I am right.
WHO CAN STOP HIARCS5 ?!
>I like copies of the game scores so that I can play over one or two
>games if there is a 'weird' result, and make sure the moves represent
>their programs correctly! And, as you know, time controls are from 60/60
>or slower.
>I have put yours and Dirk's early Hiarcs5 results into my Ratings, and
>the top 4 on Pentiums right now are:
>Rebel8 2532 Elo from 864 games
>Genius5 2532 Elo from 103 games
>Hiarcs5 2516 Elo from 150 games
>MChessPro6 2515 Elo from 470 games
Wait until you get my Hiarcs5 40/120 games.
Hiarcs is not losing !!!!!!!!!!!
>I mention the no. of games as the Genius5 and Hiarcs5 ratings are based
>on low samples as yet, and could change by + or - 40 Elo quite easily as
>more scores come in. The Rebel8 and MCP6 ratings are stabilising now and
>should be within 15 or 20 Elo of their computer-v-computer truth.
Right.
>--
>Best wishes,
>Eric Hallsworth, Computer Chess Magazine, The Red House,
>46 High Street, Wilburton, Cambs CB6 3RA
It is a pleasure to work with you!!
Enrique Irazoqui
mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote in article
<E3pCJ...@news.prima.ruhr.de>...
> Brilliant. I will instantly start and send you all the games I play
> with Virtual Chess WIN95 and Hiarcs5 against famous other programs
> like Rebel8, Mchess6 and Fritz4.01.
> I will send you notations and (hopefully) both game-files (if the
> autoplayer saves both: sometimes it saves ony the game-file of one
> machine due to technical problems or imcompatible reasons)
> and because I have found out HIARCS5 need 40/120 time-control
> (Always and always Mark seems to TUNE his program onto 40/120 level!),
> I will send you unbelievable games between Hiarcs5 and strongest chess
> programs.
> It is marvellous to see Hiarcs5 fight the others into death, and
> hiarcs5 wins almost any game. Therefore I know give the following
> statement: If you choose same hardware and 40/120 hiarcs5 kills any
> chess program so far. Hiarcs will overtake Rebel8 in any fair list.
> Wait and see if I am right.
>
> WHO CAN STOP HIARCS5 ?!
Hiarcs 5 "normal".
>
> Wait until you get my Hiarcs5 40/120 games.
> Hiarcs is not losing !!!!!!!!!!!
In the games I am playing, Hiarcs 5 is not losing, but it seems to win only
against Rebel 8. In the same way, Rebel 8 beats Genius 5, Genius 5 beats
Mchess 6, and the other matches between these four seem pretty even.
One question: don't you think that H5 is better with a "normal" playing
style instead of the default "aggressive"? It seems quite a bit faster and
positionally just as good. By the way, Hiarcs 5 is also good at speed
chess.
Enrique
Enrique Irazoqui
My message appears three times. Embarrasing.
Enrique
Enrique Irazoqui
Enrique Irazoqui
brucemo
mclane wrote:
> Hm. The same was told me by the ICCA. If you want to participate
> championships, you have to be a member.
> But although I was a member, they never told me WHY or WHO made the
> decision about JAKARTA. And nobody answered my question IF THIS
> DECISION WILL HAVE CONSEQUENCES.
> They want you to pay, and then they don't ask you for anything, they
> do what they want. No- I don't want to be a MEMBER again.
My response is off-topic in relation to the SSDF, but I believe I can
say something about the ICCA thing. This topic came up at the 1995
WMCCC in Paderborn, I believe (I may be wrong, it may have been the
1994 WCCC in Hong Kong). There was more or less an announcement that
if you want to run a program at an ICCA event, you should be an ICCA
member. There was no objection to this that I remember.
The cost is like $35 a year and you get an interesting magazine.
I don't see anything wrong with the SSDF wanting people to be members,
too, in order to submit games.
bruce
mclane
"Enrique Irazoqui" <en...@lix.intercom.es> wrote:
>mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote in article
><E3pCJ...@news.prima.ruhr.de>...
>>
>> WHO CAN STOP HIARCS5 ?!
>Hiarcs 5 "normal".
A very good insider joke or advise from you, Enrique.
Indeed it could be right that Hiarcs5 aggressive will be overtaken by
hiarcs5 normal. In the moment we try to prove this.
In my opinion the normal results are beter although the aggressive
games are more interesting.
Do YOU can tell us from your point of view ?!
Maybe we can only say accurate enough after having enough games AND
having replayed the lost aggressive games into normal style.
But maybe we can confirm about the fact that SEL. 5 is the best ?!
>>
>> Wait until you get my Hiarcs5 40/120 games.
>> Hiarcs is not losing !!!!!!!!!!!
>
>In the games I am playing, Hiarcs 5 is not losing, but it seems to win only
>against Rebel 8. In the same way, Rebel 8 beats Genius 5, Genius 5 beats
>Mchess 6, and the other matches between these four seem pretty even.
I understand but cannot prove on my machines here.
I have definetely WINS against Rebel8 AND Mchess6. And the amount is
high and the games are pretty easy for Hiarcs! I mean: they don't show
me that the game was played by 2 programs having the same ELO. They
showed me that hiarcs5 is stronger. Of course also a stronger program
does not always win. E.g. if you maybe use aggressive and the opponent
is tough it overstresses the game and loses because of too aggressive
play.
How are your hardware platforms and which time control and styling do
you use ?
>One question: don't you think that H5 is better with a "normal" playing
>style instead of the default "aggressive"? It seems quite a bit faster and
>positionally just as good. By the way, Hiarcs 5 is also good at speed
>chess.
I can subscibe the above, but DIRK Frickenschmidt is maybe different
opinion.
We will find out. No doubt about.
So maybe ed's days as a leader are count...
It is unbelievable that Mark was able to make such a progress on this
level !!!
I am sure Hiarcs is NO null-move and no pre-processor. I hope I am
right. I will ask Mark how many n/s hiarcs computes and what he has
done, I will do an interview and POST IT HERE if you want and Mark
allows ...
>Enrique
Hey americans ! Have you heard about HIARCS 5 ?????
I have bought Mchess5 and CM5000, maybe now you americans should buy
Hiarcs5. It pretty runs together with ChessAssistant 2.0.
Take it !!
mclane
"Enrique Irazoqui" <en...@lix.intercom.es> wrote:
>My message appears three times. Embarrasing.
>Enrique
Come on, you old fox ! You wanted us to read it thrice !!
Do you know the good american science fiction book:
* thrice upon a time * !
from hard-sf writer James P. Hogan ?!
Thats quality !
Maybe you should read it if you post 3 times for the future.
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>mclane wrote:
>. No- I don't want to be a MEMBER again.
>My response is off-topic in relation to the SSDF, but I believe I can
>say something about the ICCA thing. This topic came up at the 1995
>WMCCC in Paderborn, I believe (I may be wrong, it may have been the
>1994 WCCC in Hong Kong). There was more or less an announcement that
>if you want to run a program at an ICCA event, you should be an ICCA
>member. There was no objection to this that I remember.
>The cost is like $35 a year and you get an interesting magazine.
Today volume 19 arrived.
I am ashamed that the ICCA did report in this way about the critics in
the internet.
It is unbelievable how STUPID this edition of ICCA is.
The way marsland is writing about REASONS of this and that, without
ANY EXCUSE, without any considering of a moral-topic, without any
self-critics, remembers me on old times, where landlords or kings or
dictators wrote about their new orders and empires.
The undifferenciated way how he comments on the critics is not to
excuse.
If this is the common spirit in such an organisation, I wonder how the
members of the ICCA feel when they read this kind of "Emperors to the
poor folk-speech".
The pictures and the descriptions under them show heavily how naiv and
corrupt the whole organisation is. It has only ONE destination:
to control money , power and joy for the leaders who have "functions".
The way how the ICCA helped INDONESIA to start with crafty and the way
how they made business as usual to a country who is doing a war
against his inhabitants is not to excuse.
Of course you could say: oh - we have only done computerchess. A nice
event and we made peaceful-firendships and tolerant hobby instead of
separating prejudices is not a point.
If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
not to travel.
If moscow invites into an olypiade and there is a boycott because of
some politicall reasons or ethical reasons, it is understood by any
american because he's anticommunism is like antisemitism here in
germany. But if it is INDONESIA and the western countries want this
countrie in hand of capitalistic and western states, nobody has
objections..
If you make deals with criminals : you are as criminal.
If you make joint ventures with nations who kill their inhabitants ,
you cannot excuse in public with financial reasons.
These people have no backbones. If they would have, they would excuse
or retire because of their wrong decisions.
It is a shame that they publish this naiv and ignorant magazine.
>I don't see anything wrong with the SSDF wanting people to be members,
>too, in order to submit games.
A member has not only duties but also RIGHTS.
An organisation who is not responding / listening to it's members, but
earnig their fee's is corrupt and selfish like ICCA.
If I want to give them games, I have to pay for it ?!?
I have nothing against the fact that only MEMBERS do this and that for
them.
But I am a member in some other organisations and THEY offer me
something for my membership .
I don't need an organisation like ICCA that is exploiding members.
So : we will send our games to Eric.
He has not asked for any membership reasons.
If I go into a church and the priest asks me: which religion are you
?!
And I have to be member to be allowed to pray into his church or have
to pay a fee, or I see that this church makes deals with countries who
have just killed some thousands of their inhabitants, it is not the
right organisation. Their GOD is not mine.
>bruce
Harald Faber
Hello Robert,
RH> From: hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
RH> Subject: Re: Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
RH> Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
RH> the machine if necessary. However, I'm working on the real "rating" issue
RH> already, trying to get Crafty a "true" rating.
RH> Any volunteers??
What for? Playing against Crafty? Then I have do negotiate, I am not
strong enough...
Harald
--
Harald Faber
Hello Eric,
EH> From: Eric Hallsworth <er...@elhchess.demon.co.uk>
EH> Subject: PC gradings. Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
EH> Organization: Eric Hallsworth, Chess Computer Magazine
EH> I have put yours and Dirk's early Hiarcs5 results into my Ratings, and
EH> the top 4 on Pentiums right now are:
EH>
EH> Rebel8 2532 Elo from 864 games
EH> Genius5 2532 Elo from 103 games
EH> Hiarcs5 2516 Elo from 150 games
EH> MChessPro6 2515 Elo from 470 games
On which pentiums did they reach the ratings? Size of hash?
Harald
--
Robert Hyatt
Harald Faber (Harald...@p21.f2.n1.z1001.fidonet.org) wrote:
: Hello Robert,
: RH> From: hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
: RH> Subject: Re: Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
: RH> Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
: RH> the machine if necessary. However, I'm working on the real "rating" issue
: RH> already, trying to get Crafty a "true" rating.
: RH> Any volunteers??
: What for? Playing against Crafty? Then I have do negotiate, I am not
: strong enough...
: Harald
: --
No... to operate crafty at a tournament that is not (NC) (a USCF-rated
event, to add to the existing 6 rated games it has played.) I can provide
the machine, if anyone willing and close to a reasonable tournament is willing
to operate and can access the internet to get to my machine...
Bob
Harald Faber
Hello Robert,
RH> From: hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt)
RH> Subject: Re: Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
RH> Organization: CIS, University of Alabama at Birmingham
RH>> the machine if necessary. However, I'm working on the real "rating"
RH>> issue already, trying to get Crafty a "true" rating.
RH>> Any volunteers??
RH> : What for? Playing against Crafty? Then I have do negotiate, I am not
RH> : strong enough...
RH> : Harald
RH> No... to operate crafty at a tournament that is not (NC) (a USCF-rated
RH> event, to add to the existing 6 rated games it has played.) I can provide
RH> the machine, if anyone willing and close to a reasonable tournament is
RH> willing to operate and can access the internet to get to my machine...
RH> Bob
So I am again the wrong person for I do not participate at tournaments, I
even don't know about some tournaments near to me except for Dortmund and
Munster, oh, maybe Recklinghausen, but this would be in august I suppose.
Harald
--
brucemo
mclane wrote:
> Today volume 19 arrived.
> I am ashamed that the ICCA did report in this way about the critics in
> the internet.
>
> It is unbelievable how STUPID this edition of ICCA is.
> The way marsland is writing about REASONS of this and that, without
> ANY EXCUSE, without any considering of a moral-topic, without any
> self-critics, remembers me on old times, where landlords or kings or
> dictators wrote about their new orders and empires.
It's odd to expect an organization to write an article criticizing
itself for stuff it doesn't feel it did wrong.
Perhaps if you feel like criticizing them, you should write them an
article that does this, and submit it to them.
It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
> The pictures and the descriptions under them show heavily how naiv and
> corrupt the whole organisation is. It has only ONE destination:
> to control money , power and joy for the leaders who have "functions".
I'm sure there are organizations like this, but I haven't seen any
evidence of this from the ICCA. The organization seems to exist to
produce the ICCA Journal and organize tournaments. The journal isn't
perfect, and the tournaments aren't perfect, but there isn't another
journal and there aren't a lot of other tournaments, either.
I have made it clear to Marsland that I'm willing to do anything he asks
me in order to help out the ICCA. He hasn't asked me to do anything
significant, but I will if I am asked.
This is my position regarding helping out with computer chess
organization. What is yours? The position of full-time complainer
seems to be over-filled.
I know the following ICCA guys:
Marsland, Levy, Schaeffer, Beal, and Van den Herik. All of these guys
seem like normal reasonable guys. Those I have argued with are not
brick walls when you argue with them.
> The way how the ICCA helped INDONESIA to start with crafty and the way
> how they made business as usual to a country who is doing a war
> against his inhabitants is not to excuse.
Blah blah. The organizers wanted a local entry (of course it makes
sense that they would want this) so they hacked Crafty. It is unknown
to what extent they hacked Crafty. There was miscommunication about
whether or not the real Crafty, meaning Bob's Crafty, would be involved,
so there was an embarassing situation that was handled diplomatically.
The contestants were given the opportunity to object. I was not at the
meeting where this was done (the flight from Europe got in one day
earlier than the flight from North America, so a few of us from this
continent missed the player's meeting), but I have not heard of a
significant objection.
Regarding the actions of the Indonesian government, these cannot be
trivialized. But the ICCA apparently did not consider that its purpose
is to judge the behavior of the government of the country that the
sponsor lives in. Please note that the sponsor was NOT the Indonesian
government.
The ICCA apparently determined that it is charged with promoting
computer chess, not with attempting to leverage governments to change
their human rights policies.
> Of course you could say: oh - we have only done computerchess. A nice
> event and we made peaceful-firendships and tolerant hobby instead of
> separating prejudices is not a point.
>
> If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
> photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
> How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
> not to travel.
I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
hell out of the German programs.
> If moscow invites into an olypiade and there is a boycott because of
> some politicall reasons or ethical reasons, it is understood by any
> american because he's anticommunism is like antisemitism here in
> germany. But if it is INDONESIA and the western countries want this
> countrie in hand of capitalistic and western states, nobody has
> objections..
Assuming my government would have allowed me, I would have probably gone
to the USSR, too, and attempted to beat the hell out of the Russian
programs, probably with more success.
> If you make deals with criminals : you are as criminal.
> If you make joint ventures with nations who kill their inhabitants ,
> you cannot excuse in public with financial reasons.
>
> These people have no backbones. If they would have, they would excuse
> or retire because of their wrong decisions.
They don't think they made a wrong decision. I don't know if I would
have decided the same way, but it is the way the decided, and they have
reasons for deciding this way that are internally consistent.
Rather than attempting to destroy the only signficant international
organization devoted to the topic of this newsgroup, perhaps you could
attempt to contribute something to this field instead.
> It is a shame that they publish this naiv and ignorant magazine.
Without this magazine we would have approximately nothing.
By the way, the of the ICCA guys I mentioned above have also written
almost all of the books on this topic, as well, as well as a significant
percentage of the articles in the journal.
> A member has not only duties but also RIGHTS.
> An organisation who is not responding / listening to it's members, but
> earnig their fee's is corrupt and selfish like ICCA.
I'm a member of the organization. I don't like everything they do, but
I'm not particularly strident about it. I feel free to attempt to
change the way they do things. I have exercised this option recently
and have not met any particular resistance.
But then again I'm not running around shrieking "Nazi!" at them either.
I can't imagine that this works very well. If you get the reputation
of a complainer, even your good suggestions tend to get less respect.
> I don't need an organisation like ICCA that is exploiding members.
Explain please how? How can anything they do be exploitation when they
give you something (the magazine) that is worth what you pay for it ($35
a year).
bruce
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>mclane wrote:
>> Today volume 19 arrived.
>> I am ashamed that the ICCA did report in this way about the critics in
>> the internet.
>>
>> It is unbelievable how STUPID this edition of ICCA is.
>> The way marsland is writing about REASONS of this and that, without
>> ANY EXCUSE, without any considering of a moral-topic, without any
>> self-critics, remembers me on old times, where landlords or kings or
>> dictators wrote about their new orders and empires.
>It's odd to expect an organization to write an article criticizing
>itself for stuff it doesn't feel it did wrong.
Yeah ! But that's my problem: they don't feel wrong !!!
>Perhaps if you feel like criticizing them, you should write them an
>article that does this, and submit it to them.
They have not answered my email, I don't send them an article if they
are not able to respond to an email of a member.
>It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
Isn't it fair to expect answers from an organisation that has DONE
SUCH A decision, instead of publishing narcistic-articles ?!
>> The pictures and the descriptions under them show heavily how naiv and
>> corrupt the whole organisation is. It has only ONE destination:
>> to control money , power and joy for the leaders who have "functions".
>I'm sure there are organizations like this, but I haven't seen any
>evidence of this from the ICCA.
Maybe you should one day clean your spectacles! Or buy a new one.
Where were you when they threatened the amateurs in munich 1993 by
strange draw-adjucation-decisions ?
Where were you when the behaved like crazy people in the game
Mchess-Sparc-Module munich 1993
"Mr. Niggemann - continue your game...."?
Please ask them for paying the president some honorarians for each
tournament !
How much does the president get for each tournament ?!
Of course if YOU don't ask that, you will not see anything.
> The organization seems to exist to
>produce the ICCA Journal and organize tournaments. The journal isn't
>perfect, and the tournaments aren't perfect, but there isn't another
>journal and there aren't a lot of other tournaments, either.
Right. But that is not a point FOR them. That is a point AGAINST them.
>I have made it clear to Marsland that I'm willing to do anything he asks
>me in order to help out the ICCA. He hasn't asked me to do anything
>significant, but I will if I am asked.
Oh - you little hero ! :-)
>This is my position regarding helping out with computer chess
>organization. What is yours? The position of full-time complainer
>seems to be over-filled.
You misunderstand my intentions!
If they would act like gentlemen, I would not have to complain.
I don't know the people personal. But if they do wrong decisions I can
comment.
AGAIN I ASK: Who has made the decision (I want to hear a name) ?
Is there a possibility to deelect this person somehow ?!
>I know the following ICCA guys:
>Marsland, Levy, Schaeffer, Beal, and Van den Herik. All of these guys
>seem like normal reasonable guys. Those I have argued with are not
>brick walls when you argue with them.
I have nothing against them in personal. You misunderstand my
intentions.
I have seen them (Friedel , Levy , Van den Herik 1993 munich) react
unfair and NOT reasonable.
>> The way how the ICCA helped INDONESIA to start with crafty and the way
>> how they made business as usual to a country who is doing a war
>> against his inhabitants is not to excuse.
>Blah blah.
Yours is blah-blah.
I don't comment how you FEEL on this topic. It is your point of view.
I would feel ashamed if I would have done it.
>The organizers wanted a local entry (of course it makes
>sense that they would want this) so they hacked Crafty.
The ICCA told them: why not hacking Crafty fellows ?!
> It is unknown
>to what extent they hacked Crafty. There was miscommunication about
>whether or not the real Crafty, meaning Bob's Crafty, would be involved,
>so there was an embarassing situation that was handled diplomatically.
>The contestants were given the opportunity to object. I was not at the
>meeting where this was done (the flight from Europe got in one day
>earlier than the flight from North America, so a few of us from this
>continent missed the player's meeting), but I have not heard of a
>significant objection.
My brain is not stop thinking when others don't object, maybe yours.
>Regarding the actions of the Indonesian government, these cannot be
>trivialized. But the ICCA apparently did not consider that its purpose
>is to judge the behavior of the government of the country that the
>sponsor lives in. Please note that the sponsor was NOT the Indonesian
>government.
Ok, let's do the next championship directly in husseins palace, or in
the turkey, or in kashmir, or in cuba !
How about Milosevic's country ?!
>The ICCA apparently determined that it is charged with promoting
>computer chess, not with attempting to leverage governments to change
>their human rights policies.
That is obvious ! But that was not my point. I don't want the ICCA to
change the human rights policies in the countries. I want them not to
deal with criminals.
Is this differenciation so difficult for you ?!
>> Of course you could say: oh - we have only done computerchess. A nice
>> event and we made peaceful-firendships and tolerant hobby instead of
>> separating prejudices is not a point.
>>
>> If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
>> photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
>> How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
>> not to travel.
>I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
>hell out of the German programs.
I would have critisized you for that AGAIN.
I give you another example: the german government is selling the
turkey-government weapons, and they shoot the kurdish-inhabitants.
I would complain when ICCA does a championship in turkey, but you
would not understand this either.
Howling with the wolfs, we call this in germany.
>> If moscow invites into an olypiade and there is a boycott because of
>> some politicall reasons or ethical reasons, it is understood by any
>> american because he's anticommunism is like antisemitism here in
>> germany. But if it is INDONESIA and the western countries want this
>> countrie in hand of capitalistic and western states, nobody has
>> objections..
>Assuming my government would have allowed me, I would have probably gone
>to the USSR, too, and attempted to beat the hell out of the Russian
>programs, probably with more success.
>
Brilliant. Would your government have allowed you ?!
I remember they killed the leader of the american-communist-parties
on the electric-chair ! That's democracy !
>> If you make deals with criminals : you are as criminal.
Maybe you don't understand this !
>> If you make joint ventures with nations who kill their inhabitants ,
>> you cannot excuse in public with financial reasons.
>>
Maybe you don't understand this !
>> These people have no backbones. If they would have, they would excuse
>> or retire because of their wrong decisions.
>They don't think they made a wrong decision.
Maybe they don't even THINK at all.
> I don't know if I would
>have decided the same way, but it is the way the decided, and they have
>reasons for deciding this way that are internally consistent.
>Rather than attempting to destroy the only signficant international
>organization devoted to the topic of this newsgroup, perhaps you could
>attempt to contribute something to this field instead.
I don't want to destroy them. Calm down your american temper.
If I critisize somebody I don't want to destroy. I am not american. I
don't use weapons !
Maybe only some retirings from job, some excuses. Not more.
>> It is a shame that they publish this naiv and ignorant magazine.
>Without this magazine we would have approximately nothing.
Whit such a sentence you could excuse any crime at all.
Anything is better than nothing ?! Is that your point.
Thats very fatalistic, no : nihilistic.
>By the way, the of the ICCA guys I mentioned above have also written
>almost all of the books on this topic, as well, as well as a significant
>percentage of the articles in the journal.
>> A member has not only duties but also RIGHTS.
>> An organisation who is not responding / listening to it's members, but
>> earnig their fee's is corrupt and selfish like ICCA.
>I'm a member of the organization. I don't like everything they do, but
>I'm not particularly strident about it. I feel free to attempt to
>change the way they do things.
You can feel free whatever you want. I have nothing against it.
>I have exercised this option recently
>and have not met any particular resistance.
Ha -
>But then again I'm not running around shrieking "Nazi!" at them either.
I have not done this.
You can't read.
Clean your spectacles.
> I can't imagine that this works very well. If you get the reputation
>of a complainer, even your good suggestions tend to get less respect.
I don't need reputation. I am not weigthing reputation when I discuss
with somebody. I am looking for his points and WHAT he is saying to
me. Reputation is for narcistic people! They need this ! Not me.
>> I don't need an organisation like ICCA that is exploiding members.
>Explain please how? How can anything they do be exploitation when they
>give you something (the magazine) that is worth what you pay for it ($35
>a year).
Ask them about the money the president gets for the tournament as a
honoration/honorarian.
>bruce
You don't seem to be much sensible enough onto this topic.
mclane
hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
>: > If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
>: > photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
>: > How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
>: > not to travel.
>: I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
>: hell out of the German programs.
>Actually, this is an interesting point. In the 1936 Olympics, a black
>American went to Nazi Germany, and in front of Hitler and the world showed
>that the Arayan race was not superior at all. And embarassed the hell out
>of Hitler and Nazi Germany. And didn't change a thing as World War II was
>not averted. I wonder if everyone felt as strongly back then as a few feel
>now?
I really like what the black american has done. Hitler was really
upset when he saw this. Good done !!!
But - I would not like to see ICCA take a championship in
nazi-germany.
Although Bruce would maybe fight them to dead with his ferret.
>It would sure be nice to see this repetitious argument go the way of Hitler
>and Nazi Germany. There's plenty of interesting subjects in this newsgroup,
>this has become noise... lots and lots of noise...
NONONO. I gave examples for places where I would boycott the
tournament. I gave other examples too.
Don Fong
In article <5bs046$p...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>,
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote:
>brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:
>: McLane wrote:
>: > Of course you could say: oh - we have only done computerchess. A nice
>: > event and we made peaceful-firendships and tolerant hobby instead of
>: > separating prejudices is not a point.
>: >
>: > If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
>: > photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
>: > How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
>: > not to travel.
>
>: I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
>: hell out of the German programs.
>
>American went to Nazi Germany, and in front of Hitler and the world showed
>that the Arayan race was not superior at all. And embarassed the hell out
>of Hitler and Nazi Germany.
it may have embarrassed Hitler, but i don't think it proved anything.
any more than it would have proved anything had Jesse Owens happened NOT
to win.
>And didn't change a thing as World War II was not averted.
good point. IMHO the olympics are largely a nationalistic propaganda
exercise anyway.
>I wonder if everyone felt as strongly back then as a few feel now?
of course not. back then Hitler had not yet done the greatest
crimes for which he is now remembered.
>It would sure be nice to see this repetitious argument go the way of Hitler
>and Nazi Germany.
Bob, in my experience threads don't die down as long as you keep
trying to get in the last word.
>There's plenty of interesting subjects in this newsgroup,
>this has become noise... lots and lots of noise...
what's that? did you say something?
at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
the hell out of the German programs, and IMHO it didn't show a damn
thing. except maybe, how little regard some people have for human rights.
--
don fong ``i still want the peace dividend'' http://got.net/~dfong/
Tom C. Kerrigan
mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
> >My response is off-topic in relation to the SSDF, but I believe I can
> >say something about the ICCA thing. This topic came up at the 1995
> >WMCCC in Paderborn, I believe (I may be wrong, it may have been the
> >1994 WCCC in Hong Kong). There was more or less an announcement that
> >if you want to run a program at an ICCA event, you should be an ICCA
> >member. There was no objection to this that I remember.
(actually Bruce said this)
Yes, I had to pay something like 50 DM to join so I could go ahead and
play round 3. I objected because:
a) I was only told I had to cough up the 50 DM 5 minutes before round 3
started, and
b) after paying the 50 DM I didn't have enough money left for lunch
I didn't get really pissed off about this, but I was annoyed and said as
much.
Cheers,
Tom
Robert Hyatt
: > event and we made peaceful-firendships and tolerant hobby instead of
: > separating prejudices is not a point.
: >
: > If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
: > photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
: > How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
: > not to travel.
: I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
: hell out of the German programs.
Actually, this is an interesting point. In the 1936 Olympics, a black
American went to Nazi Germany, and in front of Hitler and the world showed
that the Arayan race was not superior at all. And embarassed the hell out
of Hitler and Nazi Germany. And didn't change a thing as World War II was
not averted. I wonder if everyone felt as strongly back then as a few feel
now?
It would sure be nice to see this repetitious argument go the way of Hitler
and Nazi Germany. There's plenty of interesting subjects in this newsgroup,
mclane
df...@cse.ucsc.edu (Don Fong) wrote:
> at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
>the hell out of the German programs,
I thought a german program [ shredder by stefan meyer-kahlen] was the
winner.
>and IMHO it didn't show a damn
>thing. except maybe, how little regard some people have for human rights.
>--
>don fong ``i still want the peace dividend'' http://got.net/~dfong/
okok. I don't blame the participants for traveling to jakarta. But the
ICCA could have stopped this before.
brucemo
Don Fong wrote:
> at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
> the hell out of the German programs, and IMHO it didn't show a damn
> thing. except maybe, how little regard some people have for human rights.
The following assumes a Christian context which I do not support, but I'm
making use of to express a point.
When you die, and are explaining yourself to St. Peter, if you are asked to
describe your time on earth, and you say, "I had a high regard for human
rights", I expect that St. Peter is going to reply with, "So what?"
bruce
brucemo
mclane wrote:
> df...@cse.ucsc.edu (Don Fong) wrote:
> > at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
> >the hell out of the German programs,
>
> I thought a german program [ shredder by stefan meyer-kahlen] was the
> winner.
Absolutely correct.
bruce
Don Fong
In article <32E2CB...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Don Fong wrote:
>> at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
>> thing. except maybe, how little regard some people have for human rights.
>
>The following assumes a Christian context which I do not support, but I'm
>making use of to express a point.
in other words, you are about to set up a straw man.
>When you die, and are explaining yourself to St. Peter, if you are asked to
>describe your time on earth, and you say, "I had a high regard for human
>rights", I expect that St. Peter is going to reply with, "So what?"
IMHO it's more likely he'd ask, ``So what did you do about it?''
and i'd answer: ``I wrote letters. I sent $$ to Amnesty International.
I helped educate the public about Indonesian atrocities. I boycotted
Indonesian goods. I engaged in public debate to convince others to
honor the boycott of travel to Indonesia declared by Human Rights Watch.''
i admit it's not much. but at least i won't have to answer,
``I went to Jakarta and drank beer with the Germans.''
Don Fong
In article <32DFFE...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>mclane wrote:
>> Today volume 19 arrived.
>> I am ashamed that the ICCA did report in this way about the critics in
>> the internet.
>>
>> It is unbelievable how STUPID this edition of ICCA is.
>> The way marsland is writing about REASONS of this and that, without
>> ANY EXCUSE, without any considering of a moral-topic, without any
>> self-critics, remembers me on old times, where landlords or kings or
>> dictators wrote about their new orders and empires.
>
>It's odd to expect an organization to write an article criticizing
>itself for stuff it doesn't feel it did wrong.
>
>Perhaps if you feel like criticizing them, you should write them an
>article that does this, and submit it to them.
>
>It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
the fair thing for them to do would have been to SOLICIT a
dissenting submission in advance, for publication in the same issue.
[...]
>This is my position regarding helping out with computer chess
>organization. What is yours? The position of full-time complainer
>seems to be over-filled.
i call it dissent. it is a kind of feedback. feedback that
is necessary for an organism or an organization to survive in
changing times.
some of the leading chess programmers boycotted the event.
i think that in itself is an issue worthy of serious discussion in
a supposedly scientific journal. and the *reason* why they boycotted
it is also worthy of discussion.
[...]
>> If Hitler invites to the olypiade, and you travel to it, and you are
>> photographed with him and he uses propaganda for showing:
>> How beautiful loved nazi-germany is by ICCA, you have to protest or
>> not to travel.
>
>I would have probably gone to Nazi Germany and attempted to beat the
>hell out of the German programs.
you and others did go to Jakarta and attempt to beat the Germans,
and AFAIK it didn't prove anything except how little regard some
people have for human rights.
[...]
>Rather than attempting to destroy the only signficant international
>organization devoted to the topic of this newsgroup, perhaps you could
>attempt to contribute something to this field instead.
as i stated above, i believe that dissent IS an essential
contribution to the survival of an organization. had the leadership
been listening to its critics, they might have avoided some serious
problems with the 1996 WMCCC. will they listen now? i think that
is the question.
mclane
kerr...@merlin.pn.org (Tom C. Kerrigan) wrote:
>mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
>> >My response is off-topic in relation to the SSDF, but I believe I can
>> >say something about the ICCA thing. This topic came up at the 1995
>> >WMCCC in Paderborn, I believe (I may be wrong, it may have been the
>> >1994 WCCC in Hong Kong). There was more or less an announcement that
>> >if you want to run a program at an ICCA event, you should be an ICCA
>> >member. There was no objection to this that I remember.
>(actually Bruce said this)
>Yes, I had to pay something like 50 DM to join so I could go ahead and
>play round 3. I objected because:
>a) I was only told I had to cough up the 50 DM 5 minutes before round 3
>started, and
>b) after paying the 50 DM I didn't have enough money left for lunch
If you would have asked me, I would have invited you for lunch!
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Don Fong wrote:
>> at any rate: Bruce and others DID go to Jakarta and try to beat
>> the hell out of the German programs, and IMHO it didn't show a damn
>> thing. except maybe, how little regard some people have for human rights.
>The following assumes a Christian context which I do not support, but I'm
>making use of to express a point.
>When you die, and are explaining yourself to St. Peter, if you are asked to
>describe your time on earth, and you say, "I had a high regard for human
>rights", I expect that St. Peter is going to reply with, "So what?"
>bruce
Ok- lets forget human-rights.
What about putting these nice german-scientology-guys into these old
concentration-camps we still have here in germany !!! So bruce - now
we have forgotten about human-rights. Do you feel better ??????
brucemo
I'm not quite sure what you are talking about, unless you are being cynical
about your own government, or some other random bit of silliness going on in
Germany now. If so, no problem, but I'm not going to worry about it since I
don't know what the heck you are talking about.
On the off-chance that my post has been misunderstood, its point was not "human
rights isn't important", the point was "it doesn't matter how much concern you
have if you also do nothing".
Not a very good post, it was a mistake to write it. I wanted to take a shot at
Don Fong for being an armchair crusader, but nothing good came of this, of
course. He's sent his check to Amnesty International, he's not wearing Nikes,
and he's written some letters, so he's got all of the bases covered.
bruce
brucemo
> >Perhaps if you feel like criticizing them, you should write them an
> >article that does this, and submit it to them.
> >
> >It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
>
> the fair thing for them to do would have been to SOLICIT a
> dissenting submission in advance, for publication in the same issue.
Yeah right. This would be a funny reality -- a magazine that goes trolling for
complaints.
I've complained about a lot of things, and sometimes these complaints resulted
in changes happening. But I can't ever recall a time where I just shouted a
complaint into the air and had something happen. Typically I've complained to
the people who had some ability to change the policy I was complaining about.
I was pretty angry when I heard about the Junior thing, but I didn't yell rude
things in here, I sent email to Marsland, and he called me on the phone the same
day. His explanation didn't completely satisfy me, but it led me to believe
that there had be at least some misunderstanding and confusion about what had
happened.
It's really frustrating to be in an argument with someone who thinks that an
organization should be criticized for not going out of its way to solicit
complaints. If you've got a complaint, talk to Marsland. If that doesn't get
you anywhere, write a letter to the editor of the journal. If that doesn't get
you anywhere, I think it's more than justified to complain in here.
> >This is my position regarding helping out with computer chess
> >organization. What is yours? The position of full-time complainer
> >seems to be over-filled.
>
> i call it dissent. it is a kind of feedback. feedback that
> is necessary for an organism or an organization to survive in
> changing times.
Dissent away. Go outside and complain loudly. Or do whatever you want. Just
don't expect the news trucks to show up spontaneously -- you have to call them
first.
> some of the leading chess programmers boycotted the event.
> i think that in itself is an issue worthy of serious discussion in
> a supposedly scientific journal. and the *reason* why they boycotted
> it is also worthy of discussion.
The only person who is known to have declined to attend the event because of
human rights issues in Indonesia is Marty Hirsch, who, by the way, has not felt
the need to comment on this at all, all of my information on this is at least
second-hand.
The Junior team had a problem with visas, and Ravenek dropped out over that.
Schroder wasn't going anyway, but expressed displeasure with this as well.
Wittington had numerous complaints but I believe he also registered the Junior
thing as his reason for not going.
I don't think any of the discussion in here about human rights resulted in
anyone not going, so your attempt to destroy the event didn't achieve much.
bruce
mclane
"Chris Whittington" <chr...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
>My program was told the same thing at Paderborn. No pay, no play. No time
>allowed, money right away.
>So, I got a panicky phone call from Thorsten in Paderborn (I was in England
>at the time), telling me we were going to be slung out of the tournament
>right there and then.
>It took a load of international emails (and much time wasted) to persuade
>them that my program and myself were ICCA members already, and therefore
>didn't need to pay again !
>I've gotten rather used to this foot-before-brain behaviour from them.
>And the sudden threat of eviction from the tourney seems heavy handed for
>50 DM.
>I can see Tom's point. He has little money (he's a student), he didn't know
>beforehand, the 50 DM is enough to dent his likely spending money. He
>resents being threatened as if he is somehow in the wrong.
>Money seems very important to these ICCA people.
Bruce believes different.
>Chris Whittington
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>> Ok- lets forget human-rights.
>>
>> What about putting these nice german-scientology-guys into these old
>> concentration-camps we still have here in germany !!! So bruce - now
>> we have forgotten about human-rights. Do you feel better ??????
>I'm not quite sure what you are talking about, unless you are being cynical
>about your own government, or some other random bit of silliness going on in
>Germany now. If so, no problem, but I'm not going to worry about it since I
>don't know what the heck you are talking about.
This was not cynical ! In the moment we try to forbid the scientology
CHURCH because it is NOT a church and is against the german laws.
Such a secte is against the german "grundgesetz" .
My idea was: if we forget human rights, why not putting them into our
old concentration camps. That's called reclycling !
To forbid this american-company here in germany is one rare exception
where the german government and I have the same opinon.
Rare, but sometimes it happens.
>On the off-chance that my post has been misunderstood, its point was not "human
>rights isn't important", the point was "it doesn't matter how much concern you
>have if you also do nothing".
How do you know that I DO NOTHING CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS ?!?!
How do you know I do nothing with/for computerchess ???!
Big words.... maybe you should consider again.
>Not a very good post, it was a mistake to write it. I wanted to take a shot at
>Don Fong for being an armchair crusader, but nothing good came of this, of
>course. He's sent his check to Amnesty International, he's not wearing Nikes,
>and he's written some letters, so he's got all of the bases covered.
Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
DOSEN.
That's again one point for us because we drink out of glass-bottles
that were used more often in relation to your ONE-USE-Package.
>bruce
So in the end it is 2:1 Don Fong / mclane : brute forceland.
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Yeah right. This would be a funny reality -- a magazine that goes trolling for
>complaints.
>I've complained about a lot of things, and sometimes these complaints resulted
>in changes happening. But I can't ever recall a time where I just shouted a
>complaint into the air and had something happen.
JFK:
"One man see things and say why, I dream things that never happen and
say: why not."
>Typically I've complained to
>the people who had some ability to change the policy I was complaining about.
>I was pretty angry when I heard about the Junior thing, but I didn't yell rude
>things in here, I sent email to Marsland, and he called me on the phone the same
>day.
Maybe you are previliged. He has not called the others...
> His explanation didn't completely satisfy me, but it led me to believe
>that there had be at least some misunderstanding and confusion about what had
>happened.
>It's really frustrating to be in an argument with someone who thinks that an
>organization should be criticized for not going out of its way to solicit
>complaints. If you've got a complaint, talk to Marsland. If that doesn't get
>you anywhere, write a letter to the editor of the journal. If that doesn't get
>you anywhere, I think it's more than justified to complain in here.
Your above text shows me that you don't understand how the things work
here or in any other capitalistic country. I thought you realize of
interests-conflicts. I thought americans should understand that not
anything is democracy where a label of democracy is put on.
But your idea of statements show me that you don't know how the things
work here and in any other country in the world.
I will give you an example:
In europe we have a problem in the moment eating meat from animals.
The reason is that the british guys have had a nice idea:
they shreddered (Sorry stefan for misusing your program) all dead
animals, stinking kadaver into a big machine and made food for other
animals out of it.
This way also the vegetarian-animals developed into cannibals.
Because nature defense itself with nice weapons, we know have here a
desease that is caused by tiny microben (very small life-forms) that
eat the brain of a human !!
So: if somebody in germany eats to many hamburger from McDonalds, or a
british-guy eats to many steaks from cows, he will die within 3 years
!!
Because the britains were so nice to sell their ill meat to whole
europe, and because this shreddered-food of the ill-cows was
feeded to ALL OTHER ANIMALS, you are 100 death in 3 years if you eat
ANY MEAT in europe.
This is of course very shocking !!!
So what does a capitalistic government HERE do:
They betray the people and tell them:
only meat from cows is dangerous. You can eat pigs, hens.
Of course this is a lie because also these animals
get the desease. But they were slautered much earlier then the cows,
so nobody SEES or finds out about.
The lie is: they do not inform the public that ALL meat is infected,
no matter if you eat somthink coming from a pig or a hen.
This is how capitalism works. Your idea of:
I call marsland upset and he will tell me how much honorarian he gets
from leading the championship etc.
is very naive.
If he earns money out of it, and is able to visit nice countries
between his friends due to the ICCA-money, he will not tell you the
truth. Why should he ? Because you are a nice guy ?!
>> >This is my position regarding helping out with computer chess
>> >organization. What is yours? The position of full-time complainer
>> >seems to be over-filled.
>>
>> i call it dissent. it is a kind of feedback. feedback that
>> is necessary for an organism or an organization to survive in
>> changing times.
>Dissent away. Go outside and complain loudly. Or do whatever you want. Just
>don't expect the news trucks to show up spontaneously -- you have to call them
>first.
Brilliant. I have seen how Jaap van den Herik has reacted on a DIRECT
complain in munich, I have seen Friedel (+ later Levy) react on a
direct event in munich (game between Mchess-Sparc-module).
Jaap has sold the ICCA journal like an old fox selling cars, or
somebody selling fish on a market. Brilliant if that helps to finance
the tournaments. But then he should be friendlier and not that
arrogant to the participants (programmers) of a tournament.
Arrogance is not a good advertising for ICCA-events.
Also beeing arbitrary is no good reputation, if you are the refferee
of a tournament.
>> some of the leading chess programmers boycotted the event.
>> i think that in itself is an issue worthy of serious discussion in
>> a supposedly scientific journal. and the *reason* why they boycotted
>> it is also worthy of discussion.
>The only person who is known to have declined to attend the event because of
>human rights issues in Indonesia is Marty Hirsch, who, by the way, has not felt
>the need to comment on this at all, all of my information on this is at least
>second-hand.
Maybe you should change your sources of information.
>The Junior team had a problem with visas, and Ravenek dropped out over that.
>Schroder wasn't going anyway, but expressed displeasure with this as well.
>Wittington had numerous complaints but I believe he also registered the Junior
>thing as his reason for not going.
We were prepared to travel anywhere.
I went to local-offices to give my passport some more days.
Then it was indonesia. Shock. This country ?!
>I don't think any of the discussion in here about human rights resulted in
>anyone not going, so your attempt to destroy the event didn't achieve much.
It showed how some people think about some topics.
Thats enough. I dono't have to win - in your eyes. It is enough to
show that the people reacted because they have different values.
>bruce
Robert Hyatt
mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
: "Chris Whittington" <chr...@demon.co.uk> wrote:
: Bruce believes different.
: >Chris Whittington
I'm not sure he does. However, have you tried to play your computer at a
USCF-sanctioned event in the U.S.? You pay your 50 bucks and register before
you play. If you are a computer, you do it *in advance* as there's some
paperwork to be processed. You play in a FIDE event, you pay your *big bucks*
in advance. You go to an IEEE conference, you pay your membership before you
go, or you pay a bigger registration fee at the door. I don't see a thing that
is inconsistent here. You play in an ICCA-sanctioned event, you should be a
member of the ICCA. You don't want to be a member of the ICCA, that's not a
problem either... just don't try to play in one of their events...
Of all the issues discussed here, this seems like a no-brainer, as this is
perfectly consistent with the rest of the world...
Don Fong
In article <32E9B9...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Don Fong wrote:
>> In article <32DFFE...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>> >article that does this, and submit it to them.
>> >
>> >It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
>>
>> dissenting submission in advance, for publication in the same issue.
>
>trolling for complaints.
yes, sometimes reality is funny. it is not unusual for magazines to
solicit dissenting opinions, to try to publish both sides of an issue.
[...]
>It's really frustrating to be in an argument with someone who
>thinks that an organization should be criticized for not going
>out of its way to solicit complaints.
have you ever noticed that many businesses have a complaint
dept? have you ever noticed it is common for trucks to carry a sign
saying "How's my driving? call 800-xxx-xxxx." is that "going out of
their way" to solicit complaints? i don't think so. it's simply a
smart business practice: they are seeking input that will help them
improve. (or if you're cynical, you could say it's good PR.)
now contrast that with Jonathan Schaeffer's attitude.
[...]
>The only person who is known to have declined to attend the
>event because of human rights issues in Indonesia is Marty
>Hirsch, who, by the way, has not felt the need to comment on
>this at all, all of my information on this is at least
>second-hand.
>
>The Junior team had a problem with visas, and Ravenek dropped
>out over that. Schroder wasn't going anyway, but expressed
>displeasure with this as well. Wittington had numerous
>complaints but I believe he also registered the Junior thing as
>his reason for not going.
? Bruce, no one said there was only one problem with Jakarta.
the salient fact is that there were significant absences, for
whatever reason or reasons. the absence of many of the strongest
programs greatly reduces the value of the so-called world championship.
look, the issue now under discussion is not whether the human rights
debate had any effect; the issue now is whether ICCA does or should
listen to dissent.
IMHO the sheer number of absences should give ICCA cause for some
soul searching. without REBEL, MCHESS, CSTAL, GENIUS, HIARCS, CM5k,
as well as ARTHUR, STOBOR, JUNIOR, and others i may have forgotten,
the so-called championship was a farce. you might be able to explain
away each of these absences with a different excuse, but i think in
totality it more than justifies Chris saying "something is wrong here".
>I don't think any of the discussion in here about human rights
>resulted in anyone not going, so your attempt to destroy the
>event didn't achieve much.
? most USENET discussions don't achieve much. i think the
Jakarta discussion was and is worthwhile nevertheless. if you don't
like it then don't read it. it's that simple.
i also believe that excluding the JUNIOR team IS a human
rights issue.
brucemo
Don Fong wrote:
> IMHO the sheer number of absences should give ICCA cause for some
> soul searching. without REBEL, MCHESS, CSTAL, GENIUS, HIARCS, CM5k,
> as well as ARTHUR, STOBOR, JUNIOR, and others i may have forgotten,
> the so-called championship was a farce. you might be able to explain
> away each of these absences with a different excuse, but i think in
> totality it more than justifies Chris saying "something is wrong here".
You have at least twice as many programs listed here as you should have.
You can't claim as supporters the people who we have heard nothing from,
nor can you claim as supporters the people who have cited other reasons
for not going.
If the tournament was a farce, it would have been a farce had it been held
in a politically non-objectionable Southeast Asian country, assuming there
is one.
Basically it's a very long and expensive plane flight to a very hot place.
So perhaps an unintentional argument here is that the tournament shouldn't
be held in Asia, and I don't support this argument, although I would be
more likely to go to a European tournament than to an Asian one.
bruce
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote in article
<5cgkoq$5...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
No, you're not right.
I posted about this because its an example of a heavy-handed foot-first
attitude, disrespectful to participants.
To come in on day three, with *no* warning, and demand money or immediate
eviction is not an appropriate way to behave.
The money was *not* for the tourney it was for the ICCA journal
subscription.
And there was *no* advance warning.
And I'm not arguing about whether you should subscribe to the journal to
play at Paderborn, merely that unsuspecting people shouldn't be threatended
with immediate eviction.
Kerrigan wasn't expecting it (no one had told him, and he was then short of
money).
I shouldn't have been troubled at all, because I'm fully paid up from the
beginning of 1995, which covered Paderborn at the end of 1995.
No doubt there were others.
Don't you think its important that people get treated with some form of
respect ?
Don't you think its important that facts get checked before threats get
issued ?
Chris Whittington
>
>
>
Peter W. Gillgasch
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote:
> Hint: was there a problem at the 1995 world computer chess event? Cray Blitz
> wasn't there, Deep Thought/Deep Blue wasn't there... I haven't tried to take
> anything away from the ones that went, just because the two fastest programs
> around didn't... It just "happened" in my case... arranging machine time is
> difficult and simply didn't happen.
What are you talking about ? The 1995 WCCC was the event at CUHK. Deep
Blue Prototype was there, *Socrates running on Sandia's 1824 nodes Intel
Paragon was there (faster than C-B), French Chess running on a T3D (128
nodes) was there (pretty fast as well).... Hitech (A-B version) was
there as well, at the lower end of the speed scale of the "big guys".
This was a __very__ strong event...
Anyway, we all missed you... Would have been interesting to see another
big iron guy to crash against the Fritz wall and I am sure that Don and
Christopher would have felt better then :)
-- Peter
Robert Hyatt
Peter W. Gillgasch (gil...@ilk.de) wrote:
: Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote:
: -- Peter
:
Sorry... a gross slip of the keyboard. 1992 was the year, not 1995. You
are correct in that 1995 was the year Fritz beat Deep Thought II. In 1992
neither of us could make it. After doing this for so long, whats a year or
three? :)
BTW, there's been nothing to convince me that *Socrates was faster than
CB because in 1995 we were doing > 5M nodes per second, and not wasting a
lot of time searching extra nodes. On the T90, we were seeing search depths
of 12-13 plies, still with non-recursive null move R=1, with all of our
extensions enabled. We were somewhat faster when we were running on a normal
C90 comparing to a 512 node CM-5 as I recall from comparing notes with Brad
when we played (I think in 1994 or 1995 but I'm not sure).
I was simply pointing out that there have been plenty of "premier" events
where the very best program (deep thought in this case) didn't show up, and
no one started in on this "you ought to be ashamed to claim the title with
so many holdouts in Jakarta" type of thread. WCCC '92 was a success without
CB or DT there, as it should have been. Jakarta was a success without Genius
and the like there as well. It wasn't political for us, it wasn't principles
for us, it was just "us" that year... I couldn't convince anyone to give me
access to a $60 million machine. :)
Robert Hyatt
Don Fong (df...@cse.ucsc.edu) wrote:
: In article <32E9B9...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
: >Don Fong wrote:
: >> In article <32DFFE...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
: >> >article that does this, and submit it to them.
: >> >
: >> >It isn't fair of you to expect them to do it for you.
: >> the fair thing for them to do would have been to SOLICIT a
: >> dissenting submission in advance, for publication in the same issue.
: >
: >Yeah right. This would be a funny reality -- a magazine that goes
: >trolling for complaints.
: yes, sometimes reality is funny. it is not unusual for magazines to
: solicit dissenting opinions, to try to publish both sides of an issue.
: [...]
: >It's really frustrating to be in an argument with someone who
: >thinks that an organization should be criticized for not going
: >out of its way to solicit complaints.
: have you ever noticed that many businesses have a complaint
: dept? have you ever noticed it is common for trucks to carry a sign
: saying "How's my driving? call 800-xxx-xxxx." is that "going out of
: their way" to solicit complaints? i don't think so. it's simply a
: smart business practice: they are seeking input that will help them
: improve. (or if you're cynical, you could say it's good PR.)
Actually, it's a bad example, because it is a "financial" point and not
a customer-relation process at all. They want to know if some drivers are
driving in a reckless manner, because that (in today's legal climate) can
translate into megabucks in microseconds.
I doubt they give a squat what we think of their drivers, other than if a
driver gets enough complaints he'll get the axe before he gets sued...
: now contrast that with Jonathan Schaeffer's attitude.
: [...]
: >The only person who is known to have declined to attend the
: >event because of human rights issues in Indonesia is Marty
: >Hirsch, who, by the way, has not felt the need to comment on
: >this at all, all of my information on this is at least
: >second-hand.
: >
: >The Junior team had a problem with visas, and Ravenek dropped
: >out over that. Schroder wasn't going anyway, but expressed
: >displeasure with this as well. Wittington had numerous
: >complaints but I believe he also registered the Junior thing as
: >his reason for not going.
: ? Bruce, no one said there was only one problem with Jakarta.
: the salient fact is that there were significant absences, for
: whatever reason or reasons. the absence of many of the strongest
: programs greatly reduces the value of the so-called world championship.
: look, the issue now under discussion is not whether the human rights
: debate had any effect; the issue now is whether ICCA does or should
: listen to dissent.
: IMHO the sheer number of absences should give ICCA cause for some
: soul searching. without REBEL, MCHESS, CSTAL, GENIUS, HIARCS, CM5k,
: as well as ARTHUR, STOBOR, JUNIOR, and others i may have forgotten,
: the so-called championship was a farce. you might be able to explain
: away each of these absences with a different excuse, but i think in
: totality it more than justifies Chris saying "something is wrong here".
Seems to me it was a combination of things. some had difficulties in getting
there for financial, visa or other reasons. Others decided not to go to make a
political statement. Others had decided to not go no matter where it was held.
Just because there were programs that didn't show up, it doesn't follow that
there were significant problems with the event. In reality, 1/2 of those
missing might not have gone were it held anywhere, and were it held somewhere
else, there's a reasonable chance that a different set would have gone
missing.
Hint: was there a problem at the 1995 world computer chess event? Cray Blitz
wasn't there, Deep Thought/Deep Blue wasn't there... I haven't tried to take
anything away from the ones that went, just because the two fastest programs
around didn't... It just "happened" in my case... arranging machine time is
difficult and simply didn't happen.
: >I don't think any of the discussion in here about human rights
: >resulted in anyone not going, so your attempt to destroy the
: >event didn't achieve much.
: ? most USENET discussions don't achieve much. i think the
: Jakarta discussion was and is worthwhile nevertheless. if you don't
: like it then don't read it. it's that simple.
: i also believe that excluding the JUNIOR team IS a human
: rights issue.
From all available information, it seems they were not excluded. They had to
overcome a problem, chose to not overcome that problem, were then given an
alternative (internet access) then chose to not take that avenue either. I
personally spent an hour on the phone trying to reach them while Bruce and Tony
were waiting on me for news, as they thought the internet connection was a done
deal. Therefore there's still more to this than human rights, it's all old news,
and it's not going to help anything since the event is history. Minor mistakes
were made, some communication broke down, some personal decisions were made, and
the event happened as it did. As I mentioned, out of all the WMCCC and WCCC
events, one had a problem with the venue. If you look back thru the WMCCC events,
*far more* problems have been caused by the commercial program entries. Check out
Budapest and Trevemunde for two odious cases that were much worse events for the
acrimony involved... and none was caused by the ICCA... And the ICCA modified
rules each time to eliminate repeats of past problems.
But to say it's run by a council of dictators that don't listen is more than just
a tad harsh... it's unfair, undeserved, and incorrect...
Robert Hyatt
Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:
: --
: http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
: Chris Whittington
Yes I do, however this has been a policy at every WCCC event I've attended,
it was always included somewhere in the acceptance or entry process. I can't
(obviously) answer about WMCCC events since I've participated in exactly one,
and I was not personally there.
Depending on what actually happened, it might have been heavy-handed, it might
not have been. I'll plead ignorance. However, if, as was suggested, it was
a case of "no pay, no play" I'd agree that was somewhat harsh. However, as I've
said in the past, I've already seen plenty of odd decisions made at these events.
Another one doesn't surprise me. I'd simply suggest that the group of
participants write Tony a letter and make their case, saying "we don't want this
TD again, and if he's going to be the TD, we aren't participating." Mike's the
only one I've dealt with (besides David who always seemed fair at the ACM events).
But I have certainly noticed other TD decisions from WMCCC events that struck me
as oddball, for sure. I stay out of those discussions, since I wasn't there and
didn't see first-hand. However, were I dissatisfied as a participant, I wouldn't
be too shy to speak up there, rather than after the fact. Enough complaints could
solve the TD problem, at least the next year...
Don Fong
In article <32EC81...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Don Fong wrote:
>
>> IMHO the sheer number of absences should give ICCA cause for some
>> soul searching. without REBEL, MCHESS, CSTAL, GENIUS, HIARCS, CM5k,
>> as well as ARTHUR, STOBOR, JUNIOR, and others i may have forgotten,
>> the so-called championship was a farce. you might be able to explain
>> away each of these absences with a different excuse, but i think in
>> totality it more than justifies Chris saying "something is wrong here".
>
Bruce, admit it. you're responding to my posts without reading them.
we're not talking anymore just about moving the tournament. the
tournament is over now. the issue now is broader. the issue now is
whether ICCA should listen to dissent. i didn't say the absences
were supporters of the boycott. nevertheless, the absences do
indicate a problem or problems with the so-called world
championship. yes, a "world championship" held so many of the
strongest programs is a farce.
Robert Hyatt
Don Fong (df...@cse.ucsc.edu) wrote:
I have only one question?
Have you dissented?
Would you please post a copy of your letter so that we may see what you
asked, what you complained about and what you didn't like about the way
the ICCA is being run? Once I see that, I will personally call Tony and
ask him why he couldn't take the time to answer that.
Or:
did you only dissent here in this newsgroup, which is likely what happened?
In that case, you didn't dissent at all. You simply took a can of spray paint
and wrote "Killroy was here" all over the place, *hoping* that someone at ICCA
would see it, take the bait, and respond?
I notice you like to jump on the bandwagon of any interesting and devisive
issue, but I also notice you typically aren't first out of the box. You
simply chime in later and hope to be swallowed up in the huge tidal wave
of the issue at hand.
Here, you've made a direct claim, that the ICCA doesn't listen to dissent,
so I'd like for you to personally prove this by providing us a copy of your
letter or email to Tony Marsland, when it was sent, and whatever response
you got back. Otherwise you are just ranting about 3rd-hand information you
glean from here from remarks made from others. Others that you don't know a
thing about, as to whether they have a legitimate complaint or do they have
some hidden axe to grind that might date back to events that are 10 years old
or more.
Personally, I don't expect anyone from the ICCA to browse through this
newsgroup and troll for things that need responding to, because that takes a
lot of time. I spend about an hour per day doing this, logging on at 6am or
so to peruse the nights traffic, and then checking in a couple of times during
the day to keep it from building up to something too large. If I continually
got insulted here, I'd certainly not want to waste the time browsing through
the 50-60 articles per day that show up, and I wouldn't expect Tony to do this
either. Neither would I try to communicate with someone that I have a problem
with by putting something in my local newspaper's classified ad section.
If you expect action, you should send a personal letter explaining what you
want, what your concerns are, or what you didn't like about a decision the
ICCA made. In your case, that's critical, because there are many that see
the "fong" header and skip over it. :) I'd bet Tony is at *least* smart
enough to do that. :)
So, you are ranting and raving once again, and I bet you didn't invest a single
stamp, nor send a single email. You expect to rave in a newsgroup and think
that someone should see that and publish a response in a journal.
Maybe I'll suggest to Tony that they do just this, and include a single page
in the back of the ICCA journal (the very last page, in fact) and call it
"the toilet bowl". There they could be quite poetic and include a lot of
crap from here, in an "appropriate" way. I'd also ask that it be perforated
so I can remove the crap from a scientific journal before I show the journal
to anyone, so it won't look like the ICCA is a bunch of morons. People here
consider publication in that journal as a reputable academic publication.
The toilet bowl might change their minds...
Now, for your evidence...
Don Fong
In article <32EC81...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Don Fong wrote:
>
>> IMHO the sheer number of absences should give ICCA cause for some
>> soul searching. without REBEL, MCHESS, CSTAL, GENIUS, HIARCS, CM5k,
>> as well as ARTHUR, STOBOR, JUNIOR, and others i may have forgotten,
>> the so-called championship was a farce. you might be able to explain
>> away each of these absences with a different excuse, but i think in
>> totality it more than justifies Chris saying "something is wrong here".
>
>You have at least twice as many programs listed here as you should have.
[...further irrelevancies snipped...]
Bruce, admit it. you're responding to my posts without reading them.
we're not talking anymore just about moving the tournament. the
tournament is over now. the issue now is broader. the issue now is
whether ICCA should listen to dissent. i didn't say the absences
were supporters of the boycott. nevertheless, the absences do
indicate a problem or problems with the so-called world
championship. yes, a "world championship" held without so many
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote in article
<5co41i$2...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
> Don Fong (df...@cse.ucsc.edu) wrote:
> : In article <32EC81...@nwlink.com>, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com>
> : championship. yes, a "world championship" held so many of the
> : strongest programs is a farce.
>
> I have only one question?
>
>
> Have you dissented?
>
> Would you please post a copy of your letter so that we may see what you
> asked, what you complained about and what you didn't like about the way
> the ICCA is being run? Once I see that, I will personally call Tony and
> ask him why he couldn't take the time to answer that.
>
> Or:
>
> did you only dissent here in this newsgroup, which is likely what
happened?
> In that case, you didn't dissent at all. You simply took a can of spray
paint
> and wrote "Killroy was here" all over the place, *hoping* that someone at
ICCA
> would see it, take the bait, and respond?
>
Bob, I can't speak to Don Fong, but you know perfectly well that I sent
private email (a long private email) to Tony Marsland (you know because I
also sent it to you for checking of detail, fact and style beforehand).
The issues raised were not answered, and when I re-sent I received the
reply: "I decline to answer at this stage".
Chris Whittington
Robert Hyatt
Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:
: --
: http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
I do seem to remember this. However, I got a response at some time later
explaining why CSTal wasn't considered an amateur. I don't recall precisely
whether it was concerning your query, whether it was the result of the remark
I made here questioning the sanity of the 25% rule in the first place, or
something else.
I will mail Tony and ask him to post a response here as to why you weren't
considered an amateur to clear that point up...
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote in article
<5cq6ik$v...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
The email had zero to do with amateur/professional.
I certainly never expected them to declare me an amateur.
My purpose in applying for amateur status was to show up the 25% rule as a
nonsense, and, by implication, to show that *all* such rules are going to
be nonsense.
My overall purpose was to question the whole amateur/professional issue,
and try for a situation where *no* distinction gets made at all.
Specifically on the issue of $1000 entry fees, which I believe are (a)
divisive, and (b) dis-incentivise programmers from attending tournaments.
Tont Marsland has made his view over my amateur/professional status very
clear already.
He knows that I haven't published a chess for several years.
He knows that my chess income is below 25% of my total income.
His position is basically that anyone with a computer games company is a
professional.
I don't actually agree with this view, but I can see that it has some
merit.
I can argue that Hiarcs is produced by a games company (Applied Computer
Concepts), but that Hiarcs is consistently let in as an amateur. Querying
this has merit.
I can point to various programmers who work for pay on computer chess, but
are deemed amateurs. Querying this has merit.
I can argue that a software database company, whose principal writes a
chess program, would apparently be considered an amateur. So what is the
difference between the two company types ? Does this argument havve merit
again ?
If you'ld like my honest opinion it is this: if I was bankrupt and crawling
in the gutter, the ICCA would say I was a professional programmer, and
that'll be $1000 please. Although they might omit the 'please'.
As Don Beal has pointed out, I've been running a successful games company
for many years (since 1981). Its very similar in production type to the
companies Mr Levy of the ICCA used to run. It has been in competition with
Mr Levy's companies. One time, Mr Levy tried to licence software from it,
but was turned down. It works with people who used to work for Mr Levy.
Certainly, it surprises me just how much knowledge the ICCA appears to have
about just what my company is doing. Almost as if someone is taking a
special interest.
Whether the above has anything to do with my general status and attitudes
of the ICCA towards me, who knows ?
Chris Whittington
>
>
>
Robert Hyatt
Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:
: --
: http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
: Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote in article
: <5cq6ik$v...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
Yes it does. As I've stated before, the amateur/professional distinction
is a dinosaur. Well past the time for extinction too.
: I can point to various programmers who work for pay on computer chess, but
: are deemed amateurs. Querying this has merit.
Ditto. However, I think querying it is a waste of time. The philosophy
needs to be changed, *period*.
: I can argue that a software database company, whose principal writes a
: chess program, would apparently be considered an amateur. So what is the
: difference between the two company types ? Does this argument havve merit
: again ?
: If you'ld like my honest opinion it is this: if I was bankrupt and crawling
: in the gutter, the ICCA would say I was a professional programmer, and
: that'll be $1000 please. Although they might omit the 'please'.
:)
: As Don Beal has pointed out, I've been running a successful games company
: for many years (since 1981). Its very similar in production type to the
: companies Mr Levy of the ICCA used to run. It has been in competition with
: Mr Levy's companies. One time, Mr Levy tried to licence software from it,
: but was turned down. It works with people who used to work for Mr Levy.
: Certainly, it surprises me just how much knowledge the ICCA appears to have
: about just what my company is doing. Almost as if someone is taking a
: special interest.
: Whether the above has anything to do with my general status and attitudes
: of the ICCA towards me, who knows ?
: Chris Whittington
However, your point about amateur/professional status is "right on". The
only vague concern I'd have is I'd rather see free travel go to those that
really don't have any support. In some past tournaments I went paid by
the university. In others, I paid my own way. That makes a fair methodology
very difficult to come up with for the travel part. Entry fees ought not
be required, period. There we agree. The title ought to be simply WMCCC
champion, period. There too. Travel might be stickier, because I'd much
rather see a true first-timer have the opportunity to participate by giving
him travel money than to give it to me, particularly if I might have other
ways of paying for my travel. By the same token, there are strong programs
I'd rather see participate than not, and if travel is the issue, that has to
be considered. This is one question I won't rush to judgement on because it
seems very complicated and it would be too easy to make a decision that might
be regretted later...
chessman
On 30 Jan 1997 13:09:40 GMT, hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
[big snip]
>: The issues raised were not answered, and when I re-sent I received the
>: reply: "I decline to answer at this stage".
>
>I do seem to remember this. However, I got a response at some time later
>explaining why CSTal wasn't considered an amateur. I don't recall precisely
>whether it was concerning your query, whether it was the result of the remark
>I made here questioning the sanity of the 25% rule in the first place, or
>something else.
>
snip
I would like see two classifications -- but not Commercial and Amatuer
-- but whether or not the source is freely available or not --
the objective would be to encourage essentially amatuer programmers to
make available their source for the benefit of all amatuer chess
programmers...it will defintely speed the *sharing* of ideas ...such
as Bob has done with Crafty..and of course a freely available source
has the option of entering what I would expect to be the tougher
*private* division....also ..if a programmer makes his source freely
available (of course it can still be copyrighted)...it clearly
indicates that he's in this for a non-profit motive.. at least to me
at the time he entered the program
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
Robert Hyatt <hy...@cis.uab.edu> wrote in article
<5cqkcp$5...@juniper.cis.uab.edu>...
Agreed. Clearly the method to decide who gets free travel and who not is
tricky.
It could be on first come first served.
It could be by declaration of income.
Best would be that the sponsor was unable to discriminate by limiting the
number of tickets.
Possible would be for some to announce they wouldn't want free travel.
Or any commercial program sellers to not receive it.
Frankly I'ld find the whole issue easier to deal with if I was able to
trust the person/commitee that made the decisions. Roll on the ICCA
elections maybe.
Chris Whittington
brucemo
Chris Whittington wrote:
> No, you're not right.
>
> I posted about this because its an example of a heavy-handed foot-first
> attitude, disrespectful to participants.
I don't know about this, I didn't see it.
> To come in on day three, with *no* warning, and demand money or immediate
> eviction is not an appropriate way to behave.
The notion of ICCA membership being required to play in the ICCA tournament
came up at the player's meeting, and I can't recall having heard any
objection.
The contention is that your operator Thorsten was threatened with this, right?
By who? I'm not saying it didn't happen, I just want to know the specifics.
> The money was *not* for the tourney it was for the ICCA journal
> subscription.
> And there was *no* advance warning.
The money was for an ICCA membership, which comes with a magazine. In this
respect is is like the USCF. If you want to start a huge thread about how
ICCA membership should be decoupled from the Journal, fine, but the subject
isn't interesting to me.
> And I'm not arguing about whether you should subscribe to the journal to
> play at Paderborn, merely that unsuspecting people shouldn't be threatended
> with immediate eviction.
>
> Kerrigan wasn't expecting it (no one had told him, and he was then short of
> money).
>
> I shouldn't have been troubled at all, because I'm fully paid up from the
> beginning of 1995, which covered Paderborn at the end of 1995.
>
> No doubt there were others.
>
> Don't you think its important that people get treated with some form of
> respect ?
> Don't you think its important that facts get checked before threats get
> issued ?
This is getting really trivial, Chris. It's nuts to be arguing, over a year
after the fact, about the means by which the ICCA collected membership money
at a tournament.
What is the point?
Is it that strange things happen at ICCA tournaments? If so, point conceded.
Anyone who's been to any sort of chess tournament should be tolerant of THIS
kind of thing.
Is it that the ICCA systematically abuses its members? Don't be silly.
bruce
brucemo
> >rights isn't important", the point was "it doesn't matter how much concern you
> >have if you also do nothing".
>
> How do you know that I DO NOTHING CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS ?!?!
> How do you know I do nothing with/for computerchess ???!
This wasn't directed at you.
> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
> DOSEN.
>
> That's again one point for us because we drink out of glass-bottles
> that were used more often in relation to your ONE-USE-Package.
This is funny. Where did you see a picture of my office? Was it the picture that
was in Der Spiegel? Which issue was this, please? I've never seen the photo.
A Japanese photographer also used a roll of film on my office, although I'm not
sure anything got published. It was also in a video that was shown at the
Microsoft company meeting, as well as a few meetings of smaller (although still
large) size.
And let's not forget the tour groups, every once in a while I'd look up to see
five or six guys in suits peering in at me.
Once our facilities department got fed up with my office and cleaned it. I'm told
that my scream was audible quite a long ways down the hall. What especially
bothered me is that they also took my chairs, which were "unauthorized" chairs,
and they were covered with crud, as well. But it was my crud, and I liked it. It
took me a long time to get identical replacement chairs, and I never got them
quite as crud-covered as the old ones.
I drink pop out of aluminum cans because I love the aluminum can taste. I would
stack them up on my desk because I was too lazy to take them back where I got
them. And then my son would visit me, and he would delight in knocking them on
the floor, where I left them.
Those cans were all recycled, every last one of them. I had to do it over a
period of several days, so I wouldn't over-fill the recycle bin, but it did get
done.
bruce
Martin Borriss
In article <32F130...@nwlink.com>,
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> writes:
>
>> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
>> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
>> DOSEN.
>>
>> That's again one point for us because we drink out of glass-bottles
>> that were used more often in relation to your ONE-USE-Package.
>
>This is funny. Where did you see a picture of my office? Was it the picture that
>was in Der Spiegel? Which issue was this, please? I've never seen the photo.
>
Ok, I think I have the Spiegel issue somewhere. I promise to look for it;
find a scanner and post it :) It is rather small unfortunately.
At least I should find out what issue it was in case you have access to
previous issues at your place. You could also try to ask the Spiegel people,
they have a WWW address.
The picture doesn't say: "This' Bruce" , but I knew about the can heap
before :)
Martin
Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:37:29 -0800, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com>
wrote:
>mclane wrote:
>> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
>> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
>> DOSEN.
>>
>> That's again one point for us because we drink out of glass-bottles
>> that were used more often in relation to your ONE-USE-Package.
>
>This is funny. Where did you see a picture of my office? Was it the picture that
>was in Der Spiegel? Which issue was this, please? I've never seen the photo.
Please mclane, tell us the issue of "Der Spiegel".
I've been searching for that issue after Bruce and I talked about it
in Jakarta during our "can pool party" but couldn't find it.
Stefan
PS: Our cans in Jakarta got recycled, too.
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
chessman <ches...@voicenet.com> wrote in article
<32f0f58f....@netnews.voicenet.com>...
> On 30 Jan 1997 13:09:40 GMT, hy...@cis.uab.edu (Robert Hyatt) wrote:
> [big snip]
>
> >: The issues raised were not answered, and when I re-sent I received the
> >: reply: "I decline to answer at this stage".
> >
> >I do seem to remember this. However, I got a response at some time
later
> >explaining why CSTal wasn't considered an amateur. I don't recall
precisely
> >whether it was concerning your query, whether it was the result of the
remark
> >I made here questioning the sanity of the 25% rule in the first place,
or
> >something else.
> >
> snip
>
>
> I would like see two classifications -- but not Commercial and Amatuer
> -- but whether or not the source is freely available or not --
>
> the objective would be to encourage essentially amatuer programmers to
> make available their source for the benefit of all amatuer chess
> programmers...it will defintely speed the *sharing* of ideas ...such
> as Bob has done with Crafty..and of course a freely available source
> has the option of entering what I would expect to be the tougher
> *private* division....also ..if a programmer makes his source freely
> available (of course it can still be copyrighted)...it clearly
> indicates that he's in this for a non-profit motive.. at least to me
> at the time he entered the program
A great piece of lateral thought :)
And an excellent solution ....
Might still be better not to charge participants for tourney entry though.
Chris Whittington
>
Tom C. Kerrigan
Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:
> If you'ld like my honest opinion it is this: if I was bankrupt and crawling
> in the gutter, the ICCA would say I was a professional programmer, and
> that'll be $1000 please. Although they might omit the 'please'.
This makes me a bit worried, as I'm soon to be a starving student. I doubt
I'll have a job during my undergrad years, so if I started selling Stobor,
it would account for 100% of my income, even if I only sold one copy.
Guess I wouldn't be able to attend ICCA events for years...
Cheers,
Tom
brucemo
Tom C. Kerrigan wrote:
>
> Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:
>
> > If you'ld like my honest opinion it is this: if I was bankrupt and crawling
> > in the gutter, the ICCA would say I was a professional programmer, and
> > that'll be $1000 please. Although they might omit the 'please'.
>
> I'll have a job during my undergrad years, so if I started selling Stobor,
> it would account for 100% of my income, even if I only sold one copy.
> Guess I wouldn't be able to attend ICCA events for years...
While I, on the other hand, might be able to stay amateur forever.
I've brought this up to them. My income is variable, so it's possible that
there would be years that I'd be too poor to be amateur. Other years I could
probably afford to take their free plane ticket and upgrade it to first class.
Of course I've always mentioned that I can't think of a better way to do it,
either. Please feel free to think of another way to do it, they have solicited
opinions on this.
I think they've tried to build a solid template that they can apply to any
situation. Problem is that it's easy to make a situation that breaks the
template. Chris tried to get in this way, for instance.
Apparently Chris tried to get in by claiming that he made less than 25% of his
money from chess programming. Of course, Chris made the rest of his money from
other computer games, apparently.
So perhaps Mindscape should also be allowed to enter Cm5K as an amateur entry,
since they have lots of other products. And of course Microsoft's wimpy little
chess program is an amateur entry, since it's safe to say that less than 25% of
their revenue is derived from it.
But of course, this is unfair. That's the problem, everything is unfair.
You've got big corporations, you've got little companies, you've got people who
work for other people, you've got professors, you've got students, and you've
got people who are willingly or unwillingly unemployed.
I think the current mechanism is full of holes. I hate the 25% rule. Much
better would be to say, "If you sell it, you are professional". But of course
this works in my favor, since I don't sell mine, I just have intent to, and it
also aces out people who've quit their jobs to struggle to sell some dorky
little program, in favor of amateurs who have nice jobs with large companies.
And so on, forever.
Perhaps we could start a thread that discusses this, in an effort to find a
better way. This is more constructive than bitching about the current way,
which is acknowledged to have problems.
The big question:
Who are we trying to provide support for, and how can we make sure that the
people who deserve it get it?
If we can answer this well, perhaps we could induce a change. I've seen
nothing but willingness to change this, just the lack of a better plan.
bruce
brucemo
Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
> Chris Whittington (chr...@demon.co.uk) wrote:[snip]
> : He knows that I haven't published a chess for several years.
> : He knows that my chess income is below 25% of my total income.
>
> : His position is basically that anyone with a computer games company is a
> : professional.
>
> : I don't actually agree with this view, but I can see that it has some
> : merit.
Yes, it does. And the 25% rule is bad, as I've said in a post I wrote before
I saw this one.
> : I can argue that Hiarcs is produced by a games company (Applied Computer
> : Concepts), but that Hiarcs is consistently let in as an amateur. Querying
> : this has merit.
I don't think anything should be amateur that you can buy for $100 from an ad
in an issue of "Inside Chess".
bruce
Robert Hyatt
brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:: >
: > > If you'ld like my honest opinion it is this: if I was bankrupt and crawling
: > > in the gutter, the ICCA would say I was a professional programmer, and
: > > that'll be $1000 please. Although they might omit the 'please'.
: > This makes me a bit worried, as I'm soon to be a starving student. I doubt
: And so on, forever.
: The big question:
: bruce
One idea that's not half bad would be to require anyone wanting travel
assistance to write a 1-page "proposal" explaining why he needs help with
travel, and why he can't get this assistance elsewhere. For example, I
can sometimes cover my travel with funds at my disposal at the office, if
we have travel funds there which is not always a "given". Other times I
might be able to get outside help (Charles Walker of the World Checker Hall
of Fame gave me some travel money to go to London for the famous Levy match
in 1984 where we got killed.)
This at least gives a short statement that explains the programmer's
situation, and would give a committee something to work with in comparing
and awarding travel assistance. It would still be subjective, but the
list could be published along with the reasons for the awards, so it would
be public info...
The committee had likely better buy asbestos underwear of course...
Tom C. Kerrigan
Stefan Meyer-Kahlen (mey...@fmi.uni-passau.de) wrote:
> Please mclane, tell us the issue of "Der Spiegel".
> I've been searching for that issue after Bruce and I talked about it
> in Jakarta during our "can pool party" but couldn't find it.
Damn... would somebody fill me in on this, too? Thanks. :)
I had a fairly hugeass can pyramid on my desk at HP... Of course, Rick
Gallespie (sp?) came in one morning and shook the desk around enough to
tip the whole thing over. Had to spend half an hour rebuilding it. Well,
at least I was getting paid! :D
Now here's the computer chess connection: Rick and Murray Campbell (sp???)
were college roommates...
Cool, eh? :)
Cheers,
Tom
Tom C. Kerrigan
brucemo (bru...@nwlink.com) wrote:
> But of course, this is unfair. That's the problem, everything is unfair.
> You've got big corporations, you've got little companies, you've got people who
> work for other people, you've got professors, you've got students, and you've
> got people who are willingly or unwillingly unemployed.
Sooooo, nobody can think of anything that works. Possible solution:
eliminate the problem. Just charge an entrance fee. This would annoy the
amateurs and give the professionals a break, but at least these
bitch-fests would end. I really wouldn't be too pissed off if I had to pay
the same as everybody else to get in. In fact, with no reason to worry
about going professional, I could just sell a few copies of my program to
pay the fee...
I was just thinking... this might be the only suggestion posed that hurts
the suggestor... :)
Cheers,
Tom
mclane
kerr...@merlin.pn.org (Tom C. Kerrigan) wrote:
>Stefan Meyer-Kahlen (mey...@fmi.uni-passau.de) wrote:
>> Please mclane, tell us the issue of "Der Spiegel".
>> I've been searching for that issue after Bruce and I talked about it
>> in Jakarta during our "can pool party" but couldn't find it.
>Damn... would somebody fill me in on this, too? Thanks. :)
I have the SPIEGEL somewhere, it was an article about Microsoft and I
was very positively surprised to find Bruce within.
I was negatively surprised to see his office full with this trash.
mclane
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>mclane wrote:
>>
>> brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>> >On the off-chance that my post has been misunderstood, its point was not "human
>> >rights isn't important", the point was "it doesn't matter how much concern you
>> >have if you also do nothing".
>>
>> How do you know that I DO NOTHING CONCERNING HUMAN RIGHTS ?!?!
>> How do you know I do nothing with/for computerchess ???!
>This wasn't directed at you.
Sorry.
>> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
>> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
>> DOSEN.
Tom was unable to tell me the english/american word for DOSEN although
he is an american.
So I was unable to tell YOU.
>>
>> That's again one point for us because we drink out of glass-bottles
>> that were used more often in relation to your ONE-USE-Package.
>This is funny. Where did you see a picture of my office? Was it the picture that
>was in Der Spiegel? Which issue was this, please? I've never seen the photo.
I have it. I have to find the right Spiegel edition and will show you
next meeting.
A picture in a foreign magazin like der Spiegel: amazing !!
>A Japanese photographer also used a roll of film on my office, although I'm not
>sure anything got published. It was also in a video that was shown at the
>Microsoft company meeting, as well as a few meetings of smaller (although still
>large) size.
Video's of Bruce ! Sound like Friedel Videos in ChessBase6.
>And let's not forget the tour groups, every once in a while I'd look up to see
>five or six guys in suits peering in at me.
>Once our facilities department got fed up with my office and cleaned it. I'm told
>that my scream was audible quite a long ways down the hall. What especially
>bothered me is that they also took my chairs, which were "unauthorized" chairs,
>and they were covered with crud, as well. But it was my crud, and I liked it. It
>took me a long time to get identical replacement chairs, and I never got them
>quite as crud-covered as the old ones.
>I drink pop out of aluminum cans because I love the aluminum can taste.
????!!!!?????? You love how aluminium tastes ???????????
Unbelievable.
> I would
>stack them up on my desk because I was too lazy to take them back where I got
>them. And then my son would visit me, and he would delight in knocking them on
>the floor, where I left them.
>Those cans were all recycled, every last one of them. I had to do it over a
>period of several days, so I wouldn't over-fill the recycle bin, but it did get
>done.
The can costs more than the content. It is totally nuts to produce a
can that costs 20 pfennig to sell a water/coke that costs 2 pfennig
and to sell it for 69 pfennig.
It is also senseless to buy it and then to recycle it. Better: kill
the people who drink out of it. Would make more sense !
No - just joking. The best would be NOT TO produce this and to forbid
them.
>bruce
mclane
mey...@fmi.uni-passau.de (Stefan Meyer-Kahlen) wrote:
>On Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:37:29 -0800, brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com>
>wrote:
>PS: Our cans in Jakarta got recycled, too.
YOU should be recycled instead of the cans. :-)
Can pool party ! Ha ! Scientology cans !
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote in article
<E51sJ...@news.prima.ruhr.de>...
It makes very good sense. Profit of 47 pfennigs :)
Multiply by cans of coke sold and bingo for coke corporation.
What perhaps makes less sense is to *pay* 69 pfennigs for this 2 pfennig
drink.
So who's totally nuts, the world population or coke corp ?
Chris Whittington
Tom C. Kerrigan
mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
> >> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
> >> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
> >> DOSEN.
> Tom was unable to tell me the english/american word for DOSEN although
> he is an american.
> So I was unable to tell YOU.
Sorry about this... not entirely my fault, actually... Germans call lots
of things that aren't aluminum cans "dosen." I still think my "container"
guess was reasonable...
> The can costs more than the content. It is totally nuts to produce a
> can that costs 20 pfennig to sell a water/coke that costs 2 pfennig
> and to sell it for 69 pfennig.
Why is this totally nuts? Based on the amount of money soft drink vendors
make, I would call it totally smart.
> No - just joking. The best would be NOT TO produce this and to forbid
> them.
Not only would this be logistically impossible, but it still doesn't say
why you don't like cans.
Cheers,
Tom
mclane
kerr...@merlin.pn.org (Tom C. Kerrigan) wrote:
>mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
>> >> Also you drink out of this aluminium packages we call DOSEN in german.
>> >> I have seen your office at microsoft totally covered with these shit
>> >> DOSEN.
>> Tom was unable to tell me the english/american word for DOSEN although
>> he is an american.
>> So I was unable to tell YOU.
>Sorry about this... not entirely my fault, actually... Germans call lots
>of things that aren't aluminum cans "dosen." I still think my "container"
>guess was reasonable...
AEH ? Dosen are Dosen !
A Dose is a Dose ! Clear ?
>> The can costs more than the content. It is totally nuts to produce a
>> can that costs 20 pfennig to sell a water/coke that costs 2 pfennig
>> and to sell it for 69 pfennig.
>Why is this totally nuts? Based on the amount of money soft drink vendors
>make, I would call it totally smart.
But is does not make sense to produce something that costs more to
recycle it. I mean: if the money I profit from is higher than the
amount of money society has to spend to recycle it, I would call this
a dirty business.
Capitalist profits, society pays double-time: for coke and for
recycling !
Really Dirty. Although YOU like it. Sorry.
>> No - just joking. The best would be NOT TO produce this and to forbid
>> them.
>Not only would this be logistically impossible, but it still doesn't say
>why you don't like cans.
This is NOT logically impossible !
Society is democratic. Society can elect if they want to pay much.
Society can force companies within wether to stop producing or to be
shut down. Democracy !
If a government decides: you only can sell cars if your cars do not
need more than 3 litre and have katalysator, companies have to do.
No exception.
>Cheers,
>Tom
Peter W. Gillgasch
mclane <mcl...@prima.ruhr.de> wrote:
> kerr...@merlin.pn.org (Tom C. Kerrigan) wrote:
> >Sorry about this... not entirely my fault, actually... Germans call lots
> >of things that aren't aluminum cans "dosen." I still think my "container"
> >guess was reasonable...
>
> AEH ? Dosen are Dosen !
> A Dose is a Dose ! Clear ?
And a Macintosh is a real computer :)
Oooops. Did waste bandwith and readers' time again.
Sorry, but I just __had__ to do this 8^)
-- Peter
May God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
courage to choke the living shit out of those who piss me off,
and wisdom to know where I should hide the bodies...
mclane
gil...@ilk.de (Peter W. Gillgasch) wrote:
>> AEH ? Dosen are Dosen !
>> A Dose is a Dose ! Clear ?
>And a Macintosh is a real computer :)
>Oooops. Did waste bandwith and readers' time again.
>Sorry, but I just __had__ to do this 8^)
>-- Peter
You are perfectly right: Mac's are computers, PC's are machines making
noise, beeing complicate and costing life-time.
Anything could be much easier with Mac's.
Tom C. Kerrigan
mclane (mcl...@prima.ruhr.de) wrote:
> >> The can costs more than the content. It is totally nuts to produce a
> >> can that costs 20 pfennig to sell a water/coke that costs 2 pfennig
> >> and to sell it for 69 pfennig.
> >Why is this totally nuts? Based on the amount of money soft drink vendors
> >make, I would call it totally smart.
> But is does not make sense to produce something that costs more to
> recycle it. I mean: if the money I profit from is higher than the
Point being, it gets recycled. Being a communist and evidently hating
people who sell things at higher than production cost, I'm surprised
you're worried about how much it costs to recycle these things.
> >> No - just joking. The best would be NOT TO produce this and to forbid
> >> them.
> >Not only would this be logistically impossible, but it still doesn't say
> >why you don't like cans.
> This is NOT logically impossible !
No typo. When I say "logistically," I mean "logistically." Usually.
The logistics (not logic) involved in basically killing off Coke, Pepsi,
etc. and finding something to do with the omnipresent soft drink vending
machines boggle the mind.
Cheers,
Tom
brucemo
Robert Hyatt wrote:
> One idea that's not half bad would be to require anyone wanting travel
> assistance to write a 1-page "proposal" explaining why he needs help with
> travel, and why he can't get this assistance elsewhere. For example, I
> can sometimes cover my travel with funds at my disposal at the office, if
> we have travel funds there which is not always a "given". Other times I
> might be able to get outside help (Charles Walker of the World Checker Hall
> of Fame gave me some travel money to go to London for the famous Levy match
> in 1984 where we got killed.)
>
> This at least gives a short statement that explains the programmer's
> situation, and would give a committee something to work with in comparing
> and awarding travel assistance. It would still be subjective, but the
> list could be published along with the reasons for the awards, so it would
> be public info...
>
> The committee had likely better buy asbestos underwear of course...
Who are we trying to provide support for, and how can we make sure that the
people who deserve it get it?
This is a direct quote from an earlier post of mine, and the only response I got
was this one from Hyatt, and one from Kerrigan that was a little bit hard to
understand, but I believe the bottom line was removal of the distinction between
amateur and professional. There was mention made of charging fees, but my
question was more about how excess money should be distributed, not excess
costs.
I haven't seen anything even remotely approaching a "better way" than the 25%
rule currently in effect, which loosely states that you are an amateur
programmer, and are as a consequence eligible for financial aid, if you make
less than 25% of your income from chess programming.
I think this rule sucks but I don't have a better way. I don't think that this
suggestion from Bob goes very far toward solving the problem, either.
The current distribution system seems to be to determine which programs are
amateur, then to stack-rank them by some indistinct mechanism that at least in
part takes into account strength of the applicant's program. The top N get an
equal amount of money. All of the professionals, and those amateur programs
that are accepted with no financial aid, are welcome to pay to go.
Other means of ranking, which conceivably could be used, are not. For instance,
the degree to which applicants have need of the funds, and the degree to which
the applicant is willing to share information about their research.
If anyone has any other ideas, go for it.
Note to the group's bomb-throwers: Here is your chance to say something
constructive. It's harder than complaining -- are you up to the challenge?
bruce
brucemo
>
> >> Please mclane, tell us the issue of "Der Spiegel".
> >> I've been searching for that issue after Bruce and I talked about it
> >> in Jakarta during our "can pool party" but couldn't find it.
>
> >Damn... would somebody fill me in on this, too? Thanks. :)
>
> I have the SPIEGEL somewhere, it was an article about Microsoft and I
> was very positively surprised to find Bruce within.
> I was negatively surprised to see his office full with this trash.
Martin Zentner taught me, and possibly Stefan, that a can of beer will
float. He seemed very familiar with this property of beer, so perhaps
has has floated them before.
I informed him that though he had proven that a can of beer will float,
that leaving them in the water would cause them to warm more quickly
than leaving them out in the air. He was unfamiliar with this, since, I
assume, he had never left one in the water long enough that it got warm.
The point remains unproven, since we didn't leave them in there very
long, either.
bruce
Joel Rivat
For me an amateur is somebody not making money
by chess programming. The following simple rule
can be applied: if you have sold one single copy
of your chess program in the last 5 years, you
are NOT an amateur.
I think the 25% rule is impossible to apply
honestly, because it is impossible to verify.
Moreover it is not in my conception of the
amateur mentality to sell even a few copies
of a chess program.
Joel Rivat
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote in article <32FFBD...@nwlink.com>...
And when did you stop beating your wife ? :)
My position is clear (although maybe not to everybody).
1. As far as charging entry fees go, there should be no distinction between
amateurs and professionals. I think that the divisiveness caused by this
charging on money is not acceptable.
2. As far as support for travelling and so on goes, I've not got any real
objection to making this some kind of means tested issue. Of course, given
adequate funds then there's no need to, since everybody can get supported.
For travel expenses, I think this should relate to general income, rather
than chess income. Suppose I have $100,000,000. And I'm an amateur
programmer. Why should I get a free ticket over a student who sells his
program ?
It could be graded:
Student
Unemployed
Working
Self-employed and doing well
Rich bastard
I reckon most people could be trusted to categorise themselves. And, if
anybody was obviously lying - well its a small world, it wouldn't go down
too well.
As to separate prizes for amateur/professional. Scrap the idea.
Chris Whittington
>
> bruce
>
Chris Whittington
--
http://www.demon.co.uk/oxford-soft
Joel Rivat <ri...@desargues.univ-lyon1.fr> wrote in article
<5dpept$9...@tempo.univ-lyon1.fr>...
> For me an amateur is somebody not making money
> by chess programming. The following simple rule
> can be applied: if you have sold one single copy
> of your chess program in the last 5 years, you
> are NOT an amateur.
But you still might be broke ?
Why is this rule based on income from chess ?
If you have to have a rule, why not base it on total income ?
You can take my case, which was a direct challenge to the 25% rule as an
example.
My 'testing' application was turned down, not unreasonably, on the real
grounds that I could afford it. That's what the stuff about 13.1% of income
from chess, but the remainder from computer games was about. Its not really
relevant what the other income is from, just that it is perceived to be
sufficiently large.
One reason there's endless argument about these issues is because too many
complex, inter-dependent factors are involved.
Because I've not published a chess program for 3+ years, there is quite
strong case for me to say I'm an amateur. It has to be possible for a
commercial programmer to return to amateur status. And you should note that
*intention* to publish after the time is not taken into account. Viz all
the 'amateur' progs that then start selling.
But because I've got some money in the bank, and a 'reasonable' income,
there's not much excuse for me to get a free air ticket. And anyway, as
I've said before, I'm not
travelling economy class on a 20 hour flight. Try it once, never again.
So: if air tickets are limited, their distribution should be based on need,
and then maybe perceived quality of program. Not on whether you've sold a
few, or none, or lots of copies of a program some time or other.
There's no need for amateur/professional status if the separate prize
categories are abolished and there is just one winner.
There doesn't seem to me to be much purpose in charging some entries an
admission fee, and some not. Many 'commercial' programmers are as good as
broke. So scrap the $1000 entry fee. Scrap the amateur/professional
distinction and base any limited air ticket/travel support on need.
>
> I think the 25% rule is impossible to apply
> honestly, because it is impossible to verify.
The statement of the 25% rule, asked for a statement of income proportion
signed by a qualified accountant. Thus it is verifiable. Qualified
accountants, despite jokes about 2+2=5, usually have reputations to
preserve.
Chris Whittington
Robert Hyatt
Don Beal (d...@dcs.qmw.ac.uk) wrote:
: Thanks for the contributions on travel money and entry fees.
: This a useful input to the ICCA, and we welcome the opinions of
: all participants in ICCA events on this matter (and the opinions
: of ICCA members who are potential participants).
: Don Beal.
While Bruce and I have slightly different opinions on how to best pull
this off, I believe we agree that the first priority should be to get
those there that can't get there on their own. The others will either
come because they can, or won't because they choose not to, but it is
doubtful that a ticket would make much difference.
I'd like to see the amateur/professional titles scrapped, completely.
The time has come to get rid of that since no one cares about the many
titles, just who's best.
I'm not sure that "amateur tickets only" is the fairest, although it has
not been bad in the past. However, I'd rather see a beginning professional
(that's nearly broke) attend free while a program sponsored by a company
or large university have to pay their own way if possible. It would be
subjective, but would be doable...
Harald Faber
quoting a mail from gillga # ilk.de
Hello Peter,
PWG> From: gil...@ilk.de (Peter W. Gillgasch)
PWG> Subject: Re: Why no Virtual Chess included in SSDF?
PWG> Organization: Organised ? Who ? Me ?
PWG> > AEH ? Dosen are Dosen !
PWG> > A Dose is a Dose ! Clear ?
PWG>
PWG> And a Macintosh is a real computer :)
But what a pity is unrelatively expensive and doesn't support good chess-
programs. :-)
Harald
--
Rolf Tueschen
brucemo <bru...@nwlink.com> wrote:
>Robert Hyatt wrote:
>> For example, I
>> can sometimes cover my travel with funds at my disposal at the office, if
>> we have travel funds there which is not always a "given". Other times I
>> might be able to get outside help (Charles Walker of the World Checker Hall
>> of Fame gave me some travel money to go to London for the famous Levy match
>> in 1984 where we got killed.)
>>
>Who are we trying to provide support for, and how can we make sure that the
>people who deserve it get it?
>If anyone has any other ideas, go for it.
>Note to the group's bomb-throwers: Here is your chance to say something
>constructive. It's harder than complaining -- are you up to the challenge?
>bruce
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Buddy, me as well known non-bomb-thrower let me tell you this.
What *I* wanted to see more than your mostly interesting attempt was an opening
of ICCA officials to this rgcc as well. For instance read my sentence at the
end of this post.
That was the main error with the Jakarta decision (who did it?) that although
many experts gave their opinion here in rgcc absolutely no (?) ICCA showed up.
But in secret talks (read Frederic Friedel in CSS 5/96) matters were discussed
continuously. And primarily it had to do with m o n e y.
Now your post seems to look like a test baloon or s.th. like that. Now suddenly
e v e r y o n e should take part. How democratic. And very good indeed.
But first of all there should be some explanations about Jakarta not only by
you but some (? :)) officials. A n d then there should be some elections, if
you know what I mean ...
BTW how much money sponsors of the last event gave to ICCA officials?
Just to have some numbers for further calculations about 25% or less.
Chuckle.
IGM Rolf Tueschen
----------
P:S. For those who didn't know yet: In my post from last autumn I confounded
Mr. Tony Marsland with Mr. David Levy. The president of ICCA Mr. Tony Marsland
didn't do these continuous talks with Mr. Friedel concerning Jakarta and Plan
B.
I regret this confusion.
For me the two had become almost twin brothers after reading the editorial
about both their merits for computer chess in the past decades.
My sincerest apology for that mistake. Even for a newbie it was a very big
mistake. No doubt about it.
Hope Mr. Marsland now (after clarification of the big confusion) could finally
enter debate over ICCA, Jakarta and so on here in that newsgroup too.