Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Eric Schiller about the Cadaques Qualifier

Author: Mark Young

Date: 20:28:59 10/11/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 11, 2002 at 21:11:45, Ed Schröder wrote:

>The Dubious Qualifier
>How Fritz "earned" the right to play the Million Dollar Challenge
>
>As Vladimir Kramnik does battle with Fritz in the battle of Bahrain, scheduled
>for an October 2002 start, many will no doubt be interested in how this match
>came about, and how the participants were chosen. The Human representative,
>Kramnik, was automatically invited by virtue of his holding the traditional
>World Champion title, which he earned by defeating Kasparov in their 2000 match,
>where I participated as arbiter.
>
>As soon as the BGN World Championship match between Kasparov and Kramnik had
>concluded, Ray Keene asked me to begin working on the Man vs. Machine Million
>Dollar Challenge (as it was then called, at my suggestion). It wasn’t until the
>end of March, however, that the organization of the qualification and final
>match got down to details. The qualifying event turned out to be quite a
>controversial affair. I felt to withdraw as arbiter for reasons which will be
>presented in Part One of this document. That did not affect my status as arbiter
>of the final, and I developed a full set of rules for the match, in cooperation
>with both Team Fritz and Team Kramnik. That will be covered in Part Two.
>However, events of September 11, 2001 forced a postponement of the match. During
>the interval, BGN sold the rights for the match to the Einstein TV group, who
>hired Malcolm Pein to take on the role previously occupied by Ray Keene. I was
>again invited as arbiter, but my participation was vetoed by Team Fritz, as will
>be discussed in Part Three.
>
>Part One deals with the controversial qualifying tournament held in Cadaques,
>Spain,. to choose a challenger for Kramnik. Because many questions have been
>raised about this event, I am going to refrain from presenting any prejudicial
>commentary, though I may do so at some time in the future. Instead, I place in
>the public record a large set of internal emails. I should point out that I
>never received any compensation for my work, and am under no obligation to keep
>this material from the public. It is certainly in the public interest to make
>this material available, and however one might judge the actions of each
>individual, I think that all the correspondents behaved very well. Indeed, even
>after I withdrew from the qualifier I remained an integral part of the team
>working on the big final match, so obviously we felt confident that we could all
>work together. It is not my intention to disparage any individuals involved.
>Each has made very significant contributions to chess and our disagreements over
>matters of policy and philosophy should not be taken as personal animosity.
>
>More at: http://www.chesscity.com/HISTORY/dubious_qualifier.htm
>
>A couple of hours reading, no joke.
>
>Ed

Thanks Ed for the posting....Lets me know what I thought about some people here
on CCC was correct.:)



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.