Anand vs Topalov Game 9

[jwes]

Yes and those days are long gone. No adjournments....terrible.

You can't really have adjournments these days, the best computer would win.

[Terry McCracken]

Yes and those days are long gone. No adjournments....terrible.

You can't really have adjournments these days, the best computer would win.

Both have access, the playing field is level in that regard.

[Uri Blass]

Yes and those days are long gone. No adjournments....terrible.

You can't really have adjournments these days, the best computer would win.

From moral point of view I do not see how computers change the picture.
In the past people who had better human helpers(during the time of the adjournments) had an advantage.

Uri

[jwes]

Yes and those days are long gone. No adjournments....terrible.

You can't really have adjournments these days, the best computer would win.

Both have access, the playing field is level in that regard.

So it wouldn't bother you if one player had a sponsor who would put a thousand times more computer power (and hire the programmers to make it useful) at his disposal than the other player could afford?

[Uri Blass]

Yes and those days are long gone. No adjournments....terrible.

You can't really have adjournments these days, the best computer would win.

Both have access, the playing field is level in that regard.

So it wouldn't bother you if one player had a sponsor who would put a thousand times more computer power (and hire the programmers to make it useful) at his disposal than the other player could afford?

This can happen also with opening preperations and I think that the effect of something like that in delayed game is going to be relatively very small and at least 90% of the delayed games are going to be finished with the expected theoretical result.

It does not mean that allowing delayed games with the help of computers is ok but the main problem with it is that it is going to reduce the importance of knowledge of the endgame.

Uri