Warning: mysql_close(): 18 is not a valid MySQL-Link resource in /home/ientist1/public_html/blog/addcomment.php on line 74
Warning: mysql_close(): 18 is not a valid MySQL-Link resource in /home/ientist1/public_html/blog/showcomment.php on line 215
|How should correspondence WC continue?||2008-03-05 23:33:51|
|With this article, I express my personal opinion about the Correspondence World Championship and invite you to discuss further about it through the comments of this article.
Introduction of the Correspondence World Championship
The Correspondence World Championship of Renju is an ...
|In my opinion, a new sign up process could be applied in the Correspondence WC. Anyone who plan to join the tonament, must contact the rif association in his/her country. The player should send his/her personal information including name, address, tel No. ..etc to rif and let them verify it. When rif confirm the player's identity and prove all these information is accuracy, the player will be permited to take part in Correspondence WC.|
|Ando Meritee||2008-03-06 20:54:57|
|Yes, something like that should be implemented perhaps. But how about the players from countries where is no renju association, and perhaps even no trusted members who could confirm the identity of applicant?
I also think, perhaps it would help if a player signed a fair play agreement (a kind of paper with fair play rules). Perhaps it would give some moral pressure to players who might consider cheating otherwise.
Another solution to rename the tournament from World Championship into RIF Cup or other, that way the identity of players is not that important.
|Jussi Ikonen||2008-03-07 00:39:29|
|Great article Ando.
I also think that the title World Champion is a bit strong for a tournament where basically anyone can sign up without identification process.. Multiple ID problem combined with current RIF rule "sure draw" tactics have in my opinnion reduced significantly the intrest of the correspondence project. Perhaps some kind of identification process should be taken place to restore the trust.
About Coco situation, I also wish to see swift actions from organizers.
|Ales Rybka||2008-03-07 03:33:48|
I agree with jonathan. This is normal procedure e.g. in czech auction online system, where they want to verify your "reality". E.g. paypal system wants you to send some ID papers or something like that.
I would offer:
1. to send a copy of any ID card (with or without photo) with application form and signature to trustful person of RIF (RIF doesnt give private information to second person)
2. organizators of e-WC can ask for verifying of players if there is any "disbelief"
This system can say for 95% that there is no fake person.
I'm chief referee of this tournament so I'm the responsible person.
Let me try to answer.
At first a couple of mistakes.
>as I know, the organizers asked some RIF funding for awards
You are wrong, Ando. The Correspondence Renju WC logo was designed on my money, all the medals awarded were made on my money and so on. I've never asked for any kind of funding because I do know that renju isn't a commercial game and the only way to have a good prize is to find an outer sponsor. For this WC I'm that sponsor =)
Some time ago I was thinking about financial issues, so I've discussed this matter with several RIF officials and now this my position is strong. Hope this question is closed since now.
>But nothing has been done about it even until now. The official results still declare
>Coco Yang as the World Champion and the games of that name still exist in Renjunet
>games list although she never played them.
There is quite a lot of things I can say as an answer. First of all, nobody oficially told me about that. Only in a private discussion with a private copy of your (suppose, it was private too) e-mail. And I've got all this knowledge only this autumn, about 1 year after the end of that tournament.
So the second thing is that I couldn't disqualify a player without his notification that his userId was stolen.
The third thing is that there were quite a lot of false players in the HL that year. I have to point out that in the last year, 2007, there were no fake players at the HL at all... So if we have to disqualify some nicks played in HL 2006, the list should be much longer than only Coco. It seems that 5 or even 4 players played that year. So the choice is to disqualify all players who played unfair or to decide that 2006 final wasn't played at all...
And the last thing is personal. In 2006 I've got the second place. So it would be very disgraceful to disqualify Coco with the first place. You see, I'm just a human, and there are some decisions that I just can't make. It is impossible to me to disqualify 1st place being 2nd without really solid reasons.
>In my opinion, a new sign up process could be applied in the Correspondence WC. Anyone
>who plan to join the tonament, must contact the rif association in his/her country. The
>player should send his/her personal information including name, address, tel No. ..etc
>to rif and let them verify it. When rif confirm the player's identity and prove all
>these information is accuracy, the player will be permited to take part in
Interesting idea, but it seems to me that it wouldn't help. This situation began not only with fake IDs. With them too, but with real players, signed in tournament but played by other players too. And this situation is very hard to avoid. Personally, I wish to be introduced with every player and be sure that he is a fair player. Such a pity that it is impossible =(
But now this moment is partially implemented. Since 2007 for all players in the HL it is necessary to send an application with full postal address. I have some possibilities to check those addresses, but it is impossible for me to check everybody. It is easy for Russia, it is quite easy for Europe/USA but it's damn difficult for Asia.
And IMHO that's not fair to demand a copy of the ID because it can be used in a unlawful ways.
>I also think that the title World Champion is a bit strong for a tournament where
>basically anyone can sign up without identification process..
Let me point that the title isn't so easy to get. Try it.
If someone from Maldives or Lybia will visit WC, he will have national place in QT. Without any identification process, only after showing that he is Lybian or Maldivian.
Every tournament is open for participating. If you want to win real WC, you can do it in 2 visits, at first winning BT and at next cycle taking QT and AT. If you want to win virtual WC you can do it in 3 years - 2nd league, 1st league, High league. Both BT and 2nd league are absolutely open tournaments. Everyone may play.
>Multiple ID problem combined with current RIF rule "sure draw" tactics have in my
>opinnion reduced significantly the intrest of the correspondence project.
I'm sorry but there is now proven "sure draw" now. It is an offtopic here, but I've got +12-1=5 last year, not +2-0=16 =) Yes, RIF rules are mostly exhausted but it is still possible to play and win there.
But the main idea is absolutely correct. Many strong players (such as Barykin) decided not to play because of RIF rules.
>Perhaps some kind of identification process should be taken place to restore the trust.
Yes! But how can I prove that player who signed is the player who makes moves? By a fingerprint? How?
>What are your ideas? Please share with us!
Please, share with us!
The main problem is that it is impossible either to write down in Regulations any fair-play rule or to control it.
1. Person can't play several accounts, that's a fair play rule. But it is impossible to prove that one player plays several accounts even having access to server logs. There is a simple example. You know, the internet access in Podyuga is (was?) limited, but there is a lot of perfect players. So in 2002 or 2003 there were about a dozen different players playing from the same e-mail address - from Irina's address.
2. Person can't give games to affiliates. That is, if you play in the same group with your friend and his tournament result is depending on your mutual game, it is incorrect to resign. But how to prove it? Maybe there was a real mistake. I was in this situation twice - with V. Dvoeglazov and N. Kuznecov. Both of them had a really tough time trouble and played stupid mistakes because of it. Kuznecov made his mistake having about 1 day left and in a very poor position. But Vladimir could manage a draw if he was just a bit more accurate. He had to wake up and check the situation in the middle of the night everyday, so the mistake is caused by the night time. But is it possible to differ that from game giving?
I thought about that a lot. You see, if we document that 'if you resign in a position without loss than this game is considered as 0 score for both you and your opponent', we will have two new troubles. The first is that now games will be given to foes, not to friends, to decrease their score. The second is procedural - how to decide that a position where player resigned is an equal position without loss? Maybe resigner's analyzes are far beyond yours.
If there was a immediate losing move, how to decide was it a misclick or a game giving? I don't know now.
So the rule in the Regulations now sounds like that - "if Referee decides that a game was given, he may nullify game or even disqualify player".
But I know that it is not a fair decision.
Sorry for my poor english and a lot of "I"...
Best regards, Epifanov Dmitry aka Owen, Main referee of Correspondence WC
|Ando Meritee||2008-03-07 09:50:09|
>>as I know, the organizers asked some RIF funding for awards
>You are wrong, Ando.
RIF GA protocol 2007: 18. Monetary support for email world championship - 500 SEK will be used for fixing nice diplomas and sending them by (ordinary) mail.
Please do not use the expression "you are wrong" so easily. I know you have worked hard and contributed a lot into this project, and we respect that! But perhaps you are too sensitive about the issue here an a bit overreacting. All we are trying here is to help about the situation here, not blaming anyone.
|That's a pity that I've missed that issue. Who is the contact person responsible for making that diplomas? It is better to unite forces to have medals and diplomas designed in the same style.
Anyway, it is a secondary question. The main question is - how to provide "fair play"... I don't know any good recipe =(
|Ando Meritee||2008-03-07 18:01:12|
|As I understand, the fake id basically falls into two categories:
#1. the usage of an non-existing name or a someone else's real name without the awareness of that person (like Coco's case).
#2. the usage of someone else's name while the name donor is aware of it and is involved in cheating that way
In my opinion, the problem #1 can perhaps be solved by some rules of identification of each player, either through trusted members, interview, or the local club or federation.
About fixing problem #2, I think most voluntary name donors did this because they did not feel any pressure or guilt about it. The guilt was also reduced a lot because of simple sign-up procedure which basically let them participate in cheating without having to do anything except giving an oral permission to his/her friend to use his name, and the friend did everything else, starting from signing up and playing games.
If the direct identification process would be implemented, it will increase the moral burden of the name donor a lot, especially if part of the identification process is to confirm that the user has agreed with "fair play" rules, etc. Somehow, I feel, if those name donors are facing the situation where they have to make direct lie and personally make false statement under the oath of "fair play", then they will refuse to be name donors, because they do not want face the humiliation if the truth comes out someday (in current situation the donor of problem #2 can always naively claim that it was problem #1).
What do you think about these?
|I think we can try.
I think we will try. Next year, because the 2008 tournament will be started very soon. Or... Sure, we can try to move the starting date... I don't know =)
Will you play, Ando? (-;
But there are still some difficult details. I have... or we have... to set up a number of base authorities, some players who will confirm the reality of a player? It is a very tough task because there is a lot of players who can play only via PBeM because they are too far from real tournaments. I can't identify them all, but I do know their 'credit history' and I do know some true players of that kind. Maybe we can let them play without authorization while this authorization will be required for any new distant player?
The structure of the registration process will get very complicated. That's not good =( But I hope it's worth trying.
...and the problem is not only in fake players, there are fake games too.
|Ando Meritee||2008-03-08 11:59:30|
|Can you tell us more about the issue of fake games?
I just know, long time ago there was a problem of mirror games - a player repeated same moves against the same opponent in the 2nd game with opposite color, basically forcing the 1:1 score. About today's situation, I am not familiar.
|Let me show an example.|
There were two players from the same country, A and B. They played mostly draw until the time for the game was mostly up for both of them.
And at that moment one of them had no chance to stay in the group, he was last or sth like that. And the other was struggling for a place with a player from the other country. So white made a mistake and lost the game. Black remained in the group and the third player who played fair was forced to leave the group.
|That was HL, so I don't believe in a misclick. There is a possibility of that, sure, so I don't want to blame anyone, that's why these players are A and B only, no nicknames, no year =)|
The second example is from 1st League.
The game ended up as a draw... Can anybody show me the defence for white?
This problem is not so big because the most of fake games are played by/with fake players.
Anyway this year there is a new problem - not enough players even for 1st League... =((
|Dmitry Epifanov||2008-03-31 18:35:57|
The decision is made - from the next year the scan of player's ID should be necessary. Moreover, any cheating etc. will be punished by a decision of Referee or Referee commitee.
Hope that you are right and there will be a lot of players who were afraid of clones and other unfair actions and now will try the tournament.
One more rule that I'm going to apply is that there should be 1 place in each group in HL and 1L that will be granted to a person who hasn't a ticket to this league but has the highest rating among other pretenders. So if a player who left HL or 1L with good result will try to return a couple of years later then he has a fine chance to skip 2nd League and get a place that fit his skills better.
The other side of the medal is that it should be necessary to get into top-5 instead of top-6 in order to play in HL next year.
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 00:26:19|
|I have also heard many talks about people using Blackstone and other playing software during their E-mail WC games. Is that true? If so, how to prevent this from happening?|
|Dmitry Epifanov||2008-04-04 02:18:30|
|I see no problem in that. More then, I recommend to use such information sources as game databases, theory books and renju software such as Blackstone. You see, software can only reduce the time costs for finding force win, and only in a limited depth.
But there is a trap. Software such as BS are good in finding and proving VCT. But it is very weak in position-style playing and in ideas. It can connect areas only if there is a straight victory. This straight style may lead to victory if the opponent will make a mistake, but if there is no victory or it is too complicated for software, the result will be pathetic.
One more thing. You see, people are analyzing games not using only their head. They also use board, put stones on it, try different moves. Is it bad? Is it the thing that has to be forbidden? Of course, no. And the software/bases/books etc. are the same kind of thing. They may help you, but they can't win for you.
So it is 'comme il faut' to use not only head and even not only board, but BS, RenLib, Solver, ShowRenju and anything else to analyze games during Correspondence WC.
The last, but not the least. It is impossible to prohibit software in the tournament. So it has to be permitted =) So all the players from HL and the most players of 1L use databases and software. That is a real life.
That is what I think on this issue.
|Aivo Oll||2008-04-04 03:32:21|
|Well, considering that the most popular patterns in last year`s HL were long variant in D11 and the one you showed in the D11 topic, it seems to me that players rely too much on blackstone and do not want to play anything interesting themselves. |
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 12:49:40|
|It is really sad if the correspondence renju has reached the situation where even referee thinks that using the playing software is acceptable. My question is, if a player who uses the Blackstone or other robot in all his games and wins the tournament, who is the winner then - the player or that robot?
If the player just becomes just a biological extension of a robot, helping robot to click moves, then do we need a player at all? Perhaps it is easier to connect program directly to pmbserv and let it play automatically. If robots are allowed, then it is possible that a creator of a strong software can become a "world champion" without even making one move by his own brain.
There are two issues here.
1. Should robots be allowed during official RIF title competition?
2. If not, then how to prevent people using it?
I can understand that the questions 2 can be challenging, but if question 1 gets answer "yes", then I am sure it should never be called official "World Championship".
There is a clear line between active and passive renju material. In Online Renju Class offline tournaments we had always the fair play rule - any active renju material (robots) was not allowed. Let the player decide his own moves in unknown situation, let the player detect the VCF and VCT situations by himself.
If the excuse of using robots is to "save time", then don't worry - as robots get stronger, there is less need for human anyway, so you can "save more time", even to the point where your brain is no longer needed. And it becomes "Robots World Championship".
One thing is sure, I would never join this kind of circus where players win their games thanks to robots who search wins for them. I deeply value the high moral of title competition by which we are trying to find out the strongest "human player", and not the strongest "engineer" who can operate with most robots at the same time and can afford to make or buy more advanced robots than his competitors.
I wonder, what would be the final standings of correspondence WC, if the players played fairly, wiithout using robots?
As long as fair play is not restored (robots allowed and fake players can join), I am sure I will never join such events. It is a waste of time. I think there is no satisfaction of being just a muscular extension for a robot, with an idle brain.
|Dmitry Epifanov||2008-04-04 15:44:20|
>It is really sad if the correspondence renju has reached the situation where
>even referee thinks that using the playing software is acceptable. My question
>is, if a player who uses the Blackstone or other robot in all his games and
>wins the tournament, who is the winner then - the player or that robot?
I can just try to repeat my previous sentences.
1. No playing software can grant win to a player. Playing only by software/robot is a sure way to lose.
2. If you can't restrict something, accept it and use it. It is impossible to restrict any kind of computer analyzing.
Did you here me? Do you hear me now? Surely the answer is negative...
>If the player just becomes just a biological extension of a robot, helping
>robot to click moves, then do we need a player at all?
Robot can't win. At this moment, of course. Someday human willn't be able to beat computer, but now the strongest program plays about 1st-4th dan, strong human player can beat it without great problems. Position-style players will do it easily, attacking-style players will have some problems but still can overwhelm it on class.
>Perhaps it is easier to connect program directly to pmbserv and let it play
I had such an idea. It is possible, I suppose. But the result will be pathetic. If you wish, we can try such robot with me. With 135 days control I'm going to have against pure robot at least 75% score without using BS. Pure robot is only BS, Solver, database, no human intelligence.
>If robots are allowed, then it is possible that a creator of a strong software
>can become a "world champion" without even making one move by his own brain.
Yet the answer is 'no'. Positional style, planning, even long wins in renju mittelspiel is far beyond current computer abilities. You see, the number of possible variants is much higher than, for example, in chess. It is possible to reduce this amount in the beginning, but since 40-50 stones are already on the board, computer's effectiveness lowers significantly because the whole board is already affected and comp has to analyze about 100-150 variants of each move. Human player can find win faster and deeper than computer in that stage.
>There are two issues here.
>1. Should robots be allowed during official RIF title competition?
>2. If not, then how to prevent people using it?
There was a precedent. Oleg Stepanov played by his program. He couldn't get out from 2nd league: program can't beat human. That is impossible.
>I can understand that the questions 2 can be challenging, but if question 1
>gets answer "yes", then I am sure it should never be called official "World
You are wrong, I suppose. Your opinion is too idealistic maybe.
Let's look at chess, it is the sport which gave a lot of organizing and rule moments to renju.
Sure you know that human has no chance against chess program novadays.
But there is a federation of Correspondence Chess (ICCF), they are playing for the World Champion title, and it is very hard to get this title. No restrictions on program usage is implied.
That is a concept. Playing face-to-face means that you use only your mind. Playing correspondence means that you use anything you can. But it is a great mistake to think that one can win WC not using his mind, only by a program.
>There is a clear line between active and passive renju material. In Online
>Renju Class offline tournaments we had always the fair play rule - any active
>renju material (robots) was not allowed. Let the player decide his own moves
>in unknown situation, let the player detect the VCF and VCT situations by
That is fine for face-to-face or online. But... I'm sure I can show you some players who play on the ORC using renju board. Trying moves, putting stones, testing variants. Do you know that? Is it bad? They use renju databases with statistics, is it bad?
Can you be sure that a person having 2 computers will not use the second for a robot help? Please answer these several questions, it is important.
>If the excuse of using robots is to "save time", then don't worry - as robots
>get stronger, there is less need for human anyway, so you can "save more
>time", even to the point where your brain is no longer needed. And it becomes
>"Robots World Championship".
Sorry, but you don't know what you are talking about. You now just offending me and a lot of other correspondence players. You see, it took about 1-3 hrs per day (each day!) even to get into HL for me.
>One thing is sure, I would never join this kind of circus where players win
>their games thanks to robots who search wins for them. I deeply value the high
>moral of title competition by which we are trying to find out the strongest
>"human player", and not the strongest "engineer" who can operate with most
>robots at the same time and can afford to make or buy more advanced robots
>than his competitors.
Hmmm. Now you must say also that you will never play online. Because there might be robots too. Go on, say it, Ando.
>I wonder, what would be the final standings of correspondence WC, if the
>players played fairly, wiithout using robots?
Hmmmm. What would be the final standings of ORC tournaments if the players played fairly, without boards on their knees, without second comp with BS?..
Anyway. Look at the chess. They have much more problems with computer help but the game is alive and correspondence chess are developing rapidly.
The only thing you can get from this position is to remove WC title from Correspondence tournament by your personal authority (if it is possible) thus reducing game developing possibilities and taking away playing option for faraway people such as Oleg Fedorkin, Nizami Heybatov and so on.
>As long as fair play is not restored (robots allowed and fake players can
>join), I am sure I will never join such events. It is a waste of time. I think
>there is no satisfaction of being just a muscular extension for a robot, with
>an idle brain.
At first, let's split the question. There should be no fake players, I agree with that and open to any discussion on that matter. No fake players - that's necessary.
And... Thank you about your opinion who am I, who are Zhang Jinyu, Chen Wei, Nikonov, Dzainukov, Potapov and lots of other people worldwide.
You are very gentle.
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 17:46:36|
|I even do not know where to start from. Your statement is so full of demagogy, sometimes just repeating a statement "you are wrong!" (which I previously urged you not to use so thoughtlessly!) or answering a question with a question. It is very hard to reason anything with such person.
But I will still try to explain some things, perhaps you can finally understand. First, I will answer the direct questions from your last post.
>But... I'm sure I can show you some players who play on the ORC using renju board.
>Trying moves, putting stones, testing variants.
>Do you know that? Is it bad? They use renju databases with statistics, is it bad?
>Can you be sure that a person having 2 computers will not use the second for a robot help?
>Please answer these several questions, it is important.
The first one you said (putting stones on board and trying out moves) is the essence of the correspondence games, and there is nothing wrong with it. That is the very reason of playing correspondence games at first place.
Can I be sure if a person having 2 computers uses robot's help? What kind of rhetorical question is that? Of course I do not know how many computers people have. (and you thought this question was so important and required answer. Please try to make proper questions instead instead of rhetoric, it would help a lot.).
This is an issue of moral. And if even a referee does not have it, then this tournament cannot be taken seriously. You think, if you cannot stop it, then just use it. This applies for economic or political trends but not for ethical issues. You think, if people for example steal from each other, and we cannot put the end to this, we should just let stealing be public and let everyone steal from each other? (this was a rhetoric question, you don't have to answer). The point is, the fact that some people do it because they do not have moral to use own intelligence to play moves, does not mean that everybody should become the same.
Your excuse that today program is not strong enough is really very short-sighted and demagogic. It is about the principle itself. As it is unethical to allow another player make moves instead of us, it is also unethical to let a robot make moves instead of us. (and I do not mean literally clicking moves here, in case you were going to pick on my wording).
Today the program may be 4dan, but it can beat many players who are weaker than that. It can help a player who does not deserve to be even close to dan level, to get high place in tournament. Today maybe the program can help a total beginner to get a high place, some day even the first place.
And if you say that human role is still important because sometimes program makes bad judgment, it is very hippocrate. It is not an excuse that program makes mistakes in some cases and human is still important to correct those errors. The need for human correction is becoming smaller day by day for such matters as the robots are developed.
With your arrogant statement and attitude, you are not only pushing me away, but also many other people who still had some hopes of having this correspondence tournament as a battle between human abilities.
Your main excuse for cheating with programs is that "some others do it too, so if we don't, we have disadvantage". Instead, we should be discussing about how to make the tournament fair, and not let people cheat.
The main thing is the moral. If there is no moral, nothing can really stop people using fake or multiple ids and nothing can really stop people using robots who can help them win games. (and please don't start with this "robot alone cannot win anything" demagogy here again). And if people have moral, they will not use fake names, they will not use robots.
So, it is kind of funny that the referee sees a problem in fake users, but has nothing against the robot finding winning moves for the player.
One thing is sure, as long as the referee is supporting the help of robots, I will never want to be involved with the correspondence world champion project in any way. It is just giving bad name to renju world and the seriousness of title competitions.
The last thing, ask yourself, what would have been YOUR place in correspondence world championship if you had analysed all moves by yourself without any robots? Do you think the players who use robots deserve the place they get? (not rhetorical)
Maybe RIF should distance from the correspondence world championship projects, just as FIDE and ICCF are different organizations, in order to keep the seriousness of RIF official titles.
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 18:20:11|
|>Thank you about your opinion who am I, who are Zhang Jinyu, Chen Wei, Nikonov,
>Dzainukov, Potapov and lots of other people worldwide.
Please do not defend your side just by listing the players from the tournament. Remember, I have played in correspondence World Championship, too, and I am a part of correspondence renju history.
Or are you saying that Zhang Jinyu, Chen Wei, Nikonov, Dzainukov, Potapov are using robots too? Is that what you are saying?? If so, please admit it frankly. Do they agree with your statement? Do they want to be known as the players who used robots in their games? Please be careful with listing names as "users of robots" if you do not want to ruin their reputation as serious players.
And as you call my moral based position as "idealistic", and you think reality is that we cannot find enough moral players to go on with this correspondence world championship, then I do not think RIF really needs the "World Championship" of correspondence any more. It is enough to have some nice tournament, for example "International Correspondence Cup", where people from remote places can participate and have fun.
Renju International Federation official titles should not be given to people who did not earn them in fair way. I hope RIF General Assembly 2009 can decide something about this matter.
|Dmitry Epifanov||2008-04-04 19:03:14|
You really shocked me. Everything I say is demagogy. Every HL player last several years is cheater. And you understood nothing I was trying to tell you. Answered not the questions I asked but some other.
I see now clearly that the main purpose of this topic is to ruin Correspondence WC. Remove it from RIF and so on. In chess there is a lot of chess federations. If we try to detach, of no unity will be among renju players, the game will stop its progress and go down. This is the renju popularization? I'm shocked.
I'll take a break. I want to find exact and polit words for you to understand me, other Correspondence renju players and any other Correspondence players (in chess, checkers, any other mind game). Don't want to answer by insult on your insult.
That's a pity that you aren't going to visit Helsinki because I do strongly believe even now that it is possible to understand each other.
Once more, I'm taking a break. Have a good time, blame correspondence players, enjoy life.
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 19:27:57|
|>Everything I say is demagogy.
I never said that. (please do not generalize, it is not a serious manner)
>Every HL player last several years is cheater.
I never said that. (please do not generalize)
>And you understood nothing I was trying to tell you.
Shows how much you underestimate my ability read and analyse your text.
If you tell someone he understands "nothing", it is a very strong statement.
>Answered not the questions I asked but some other.
>I see now clearly that the main purpose of this topic is to ruin Correspondence WC.
I am trying to find the way to make it a fair tournament. It is YOU and other robots' users who are destroying it. The interest towards the correspondence WC has been dropping a lot since the appearance of users of robots. Is that what you call a popularization?
I still have not given up hope. That is why I even made this topic. If I did not have any hope, I would just discuss it in commissions and prepare proposal to RIF GA for changing the tournament name and status, and letting GA decide it, accept or not.
> Don't want to answer by insult on your insult.
You have insulted me already with your previous comment. You have insulted also all the fair players who use their own abilities to decide about moves. I am just being very frank with you, that's all. I do not generalize things and I try to focus on the issue here.
>That's a pity that you aren't going to visit Helsinki because I do strongly believe even now that it is possible to understand each other.
Yes, it is a pity indeed. But I hope there will be other people who can explain you the same thing that I am trying to tell you.
>Once more, I'm taking a break. Have a good time, blame correspondence players, enjoy life.
If you for once stopped generalizing, such as "everybody is cheater", "all my words are demagogy", "blame correspondence players", it would be possible to discuss something seriously. I think my statement has been very clear so far, and it involves ONLY people who use robots. I have a deep respect to those who are playing there without any help such as letting other players or robots tell them the moves.
You did not answer any of the questions (very serious ones) in any of my last two comments, including the one that referred to some names you claimed.
If you need a break, it is ok. Have a nice break there.
|Ando Meritee||2008-04-04 20:23:16|
|Here is the list of correspondence tournaments which had no RIF title:
I have organized so many correspondence tournaments in the past. I have enough experience of knowing what can popularize renju and what not. I know from my own experience that it is possible to organize nice and successful correspondence tournaments even if the name is not RIF World Championship, and even if the official rules of the tournament say that robots are not allowed. Whether or not some players cheated, that is another issue. If such were ever found, his result would be annulled.
Furthermore, if the tournament name is not so ambitious, perhaps more people would then play with ease, and enjoy the game itself, rather than getting the best score at all cost, even with the help from fake names, and robots.
I am very sure that under current situation, the correspondence wc current rules and policy is not good for RIF. If we want RIF to be seriously recognized organization, then we should not involve RIF's name with projects which have so serious flaws and the project managers do not even see them as flaws and do not want to deal with them!
I am sure Mr Epifanov is a very capable person and could organize many wonderful renju events regardless of the event's name. There is nothing wrong about making a special tournament with the rule "all help allowed" and call it as an international tournament. Then only those robots' users would join such events and fight among each other. But it can not be called a RIF Correspondence World Championship then!
Currently your reaction reminds me of RIF GA 1999, where Armenian delegation asked RIF to allow the failed Team WC (only 1 team arrived there) to be still called as an official Team World Championship, threatening that if RIF does not make such decision, then the Renju in Armenia will extinct. RIF GA members felt sympathetic over this, and voted for announcing the failed TWC as "TWC was official, but no champion title was given".
It is so easy to manipulate with the words like "separation", "regress", "extinct", etc, as a justification why an event should still keep the name as an official title competition, even though there are so many flaws, instead of solving the problems.
We are all trying to let renju become more popular. We have the same goal. Instead of pushing the project in current unchanged manner and fighting off all the people who see flaws in them, it is perhaps wiser to look deeper into a project and see if there is anything to be improved or fixed or changed. We should ask ourselves, is what we do really helping with popularization? Can we do it better?
|Dmitry Epifanov||2008-04-04 22:13:23|
|For Aivo Oll.
>Well, considering that the most popular patterns in last year`s HL were long variant in D11
>and the one you showed in the D11 topic, it seems to me that players rely too much on
>blackstone and do not want to play anything interesting themselves.
You see, variant that I've shown is not a BS variant. This 16-18 and further are mine =) Some of the moves must be the same as BS recommend, that's because they are really strongest =) When you play 4-3, BS will do the same: it is the best move.
And you see, the quantity of games in this variant is caused not by program using, but by mass effect. One played, somebody repeated, everybody saw - ohhh, how interesting, let's try!
As to me, I had no appropriate plan in 11D for black with that 12th, so I played long variant in order to guarantee draw. It seems to me that all other 13th give advantage to white... in Correspondence, with strong analyzing for both players.
The problem with 'something interesting' splits into two aspects.
The first is that current opening rule is very, very well-known. So moving step away from theory may cause interesting game in real life and effective kill in correspondence.
The second thing is that many people are afraid of doing something dangerous for them. As to me, I play mostly 11D in Correspondence because I'm too cautious to play 8I, 12I, 4D or something like that. But there is a lot of successful players who play 9D, 3D, 8D and even 5D, defend it with white and even win...
This year you will play - good luck!
|Aivo Oll||2008-04-04 23:13:46|
|Well, I guess you are mostly right but I would not say that with the current rule theory is very well known. I think there are still enough variants to play where the draw is not so obvious result( most of them are in D11 and D3). Why I am talking about it is just because I as a player do not like to play one position over and over and I try to look for new interesting patterns. Also, I have never played the long variant of D11 as black because I think it is just pointless (or maybe my desire to win is very strong). I understand that every player has his own tactics and if it is to secure a draw in some games then so be it. Just looking at the games of last year`s HL disappointed me a little bit, I was expecting to see a lot more interesting games.|