Open letter to the CSVN
September 21, 2011
Dear Cock de Gorter, CSVN board and CSVN members,
As past participants of the CSVN tournaments we feel that your decision to allow Rybka back in your tournaments is ill-reasoned and damaging to computer chess. Your statements regarding the decision-making are misleading and those about the evidence are all factually false:The sanctioning of Rybka is upsetting news for all involved in computer chess. The public condemnation of a many-times World Champion and well-known representative of the field does not reflect well on the field’s image. The decision to ban Rybka was consequently not taken lightly.
- The ICGA panel consisted of experienced computer chess specialists, some commercial, some hobbyists, and some pure academics. At the end of the investigation, not a single person in the panel said that they believed Vasik Rajlich was innocent.
- Experts who have long-defended Vasik Rajlich have changed their minds because the investigation results leaves them no doubt regarding his breaking of rule 2 of the ICGA: Rybka is a without a shred of doubt a direct derivative of Crafty/Fruit and Mr. Rajlich concealed these origins from the Tournament Director. Furthermore, he has not provided any clarification for the found similarities.
- All Rybka executables considered in the investigation were distributed to rating lists and/or users. Version 2.3.2a participated in the 2007 WCCC.
- In the past the ICGA has investigated entries that raised suspicion and for which a complaint was filed by one of the participants. Cheaters have been caught before and Rybka is no exception.
However, it is unacceptable to us that you base your decision making on opinionated Internet postings and put aside the extensive expertise that the ICGA has gathered. Your lack of judgment, which is further exemplified by your recent handling of the Junior/HIARCS incident, is a sign that your once-respectable tournaments are not in good hands any more. Under the current direction we can therefore not enter your tournaments.
Regards,
Amir Ban
Don Dailey
Robert Hyatt
Gerd Isenberg
Marcel van Kervinck
Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
Fabien Letouzey
Thomas Mayer
Daniel Mehrmann
Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Richard Pijl
Ralf Schäfer
Mark Uniacke
Ben-Hur Carlos Vieira Langoni Júnior
Harvey Williamson
Another Open letter to the CSVN
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the fen tag before the upgrade.
-
Harvey Williamson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6079
- Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 am
- Location: Media City, UK
- Contact:
Another Open letter to the CSVN
The following letter has been sent to the CSVN. I'm posting it here on behalf of the signees.
-
Mythbuster
- Member
- Posts: 275
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 6:37 pm
-
Harvey Williamson
- Site Admin
- Posts: 6079
- Joined: Sun Jul 29, 2007 6:57 am
- Location: Media City, UK
- Contact:
I should add the letter is in reply to this http://www.csvn.nl/index.php?option=com ... 28&lang=en
I'm no expert when it comes to programming a chess app, but one doesn't have to be one to see the flaws in the points made by the CVSN board. And maybe the viewpoints of someone who is totally objective carry a little weight in this issue.
First of all, I've never seen any indication, ever, that the programmers/creators of Rybka's competitors would like to see it go away just for the purposes of not having to compete with it. In fact, my guess is that they welcome the competition. The interest in this endeavor would die without it.
Second, from what I understand, there was enough evidence that core aspects of the present version of Rybka were derivative that it would then become the responsibility of Rybka's author to prove that all previous versions since 2005 of Rybka didn't have any substantial evidence of Fruit code, not the responsibility of ICGA or the author of Fruit.
Third, also as I understand it, action wasn't taken until 2011 because that was when the author of Fruit finally had had enough of the situation and came forward. It would seem that what was either his patience or a reticence to have to get involved in such a sorry state of affairs is now being held to his disadvantage.
Finally, the analogy with doping of runners just doesn't wash. If it was the nature of doping agents to remain in one's body forever, then those runners would be banned forever. Likewise, if a version of Rybka was created without the derivative code then I'm sure it would be eligible for participation in future competitions.
First of all, I've never seen any indication, ever, that the programmers/creators of Rybka's competitors would like to see it go away just for the purposes of not having to compete with it. In fact, my guess is that they welcome the competition. The interest in this endeavor would die without it.
Second, from what I understand, there was enough evidence that core aspects of the present version of Rybka were derivative that it would then become the responsibility of Rybka's author to prove that all previous versions since 2005 of Rybka didn't have any substantial evidence of Fruit code, not the responsibility of ICGA or the author of Fruit.
Third, also as I understand it, action wasn't taken until 2011 because that was when the author of Fruit finally had had enough of the situation and came forward. It would seem that what was either his patience or a reticence to have to get involved in such a sorry state of affairs is now being held to his disadvantage.
Finally, the analogy with doping of runners just doesn't wash. If it was the nature of doping agents to remain in one's body forever, then those runners would be banned forever. Likewise, if a version of Rybka was created without the derivative code then I'm sure it would be eligible for participation in future competitions.