|
Chess Strategy
Bare's Natalie Joy Johnson to Play Ars Nova
By Andrew Gans
11 Jul 2006
Natalie Joy Johnson, who has enjoyed sold-out concerts at Joe's Pub and the Cutting Room, will bring her critically acclaimed evening of song to the Ars Nova later this month.
On July 22 and 31 at 8 PM Johnson will perform at the intimate cabaret backed by musical director Our Lady J (Jonah Speidel) on piano, the Pink Champagne Orchestra and The Bubbles. Ben Rimalower directs.
Concertgoers can expect to hear such tunes as 'Moondance,?'I'm Your Baby Tonight,?'Ribbons Down My Back,?'I Had Myself a True Love,?'Smooth Criminal?and 'The Voice Within?as well as 'A Quiet Night at Home,?which was penned by Bare's Damon Intrabartolo and Jon Hartmere Jr.
Natalie Joy Johnson was seen in Bare: A Pop Opera. She starred in the 2001 national tour of Godspell as well as the New York Fringe Festival production of Slut, the Actors' Fund benefit concert of Chess and the Pippin benefit concert. Johnson also appeared in the workshop of the play Joy.
The Ars Nova is located in Manhattan at 511 West 54th Street. Tickets, priced at $15, are available by calling (212) 868-4444 or by visiting www.smarttix.com.
-->
Chess Strategy
'There are now in the world machines that think, that learn, and that create. Moreover, their ability to do these things is going to increase rapidly until--in a visible future--the range of problems they can handle will be coextensive with the range to which the human mind has been applied.'
This astonishing statement was even more astonishing at the time it was made, by Herbert Simon in 1957. Astonishing, and as we now know, wrong, or at least premature. The 'visible future' alluded to is no more visible now than it was then. Simon (who was later awarded the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in operations research) clearly let optimism get the better of him. This optimism was based on promising early results in artificial intelligence (AI), in which many seemingly difficult problems were rather quickly solved, and the way to the grand goal of fully human-level machine intelligence seemed clear.
It soon became apparent, however, that the remaining problems were extremely difficult. Simon's statement has become something of an embarrassment to most researchers in AI, who have since then generally tried to distance themselves from it and to speak in more imprecise terms of when this holy grail will be attained.
At least one researcher, however, has no such qualms. In his recently published book, The Singularity is Near (Viking, 2005), Ray Kurzweil predicts that a 'singularity' will be reached in the next couple of decades when computers will first equal and then soon far surpass human abilities in all fields of thought. Humans will not be left behind, however. We will augment our physical, mental and sensory abilities with increasingly sophisticated implants and plug-ins, so that the distinction between human and machine will fade away and become irrelevant. In this vision, which is often called 'transhumanism', we will merge with our computers and become a new species of thinking being.
Who is Ray Kurzweil, and why do some very smart people take him seriously? He is no armchair futurologist. He has worked for many years in the field of artificial intelligence and has numerous inventions to his credit, including a print-to-speech reader for the blind, a music synthesiser, and a speech recognition system. So he is well acquainted with what computers can and can't do at present. Another quality that sets his predictions apart from most others is his use of quantitative estimates. The dates he predicts for the occurrence of such events as the equalling of the computing power of a human brain by a US$1,000 laptop are found by extrapolating charts of existing trends, and are not mere dreamy surmise.
Kurzweil is also an unsinkable optimist. He is confident that the rapid pace of improvement that we have seen in both computer hardware and software in recent decades will continue indefinitely, and even increase. At the heart of this argument is what he calls the 'Law of Accelerating Returns'. In simplest terms, it posits that technology feeds back into its own development, so that the rate of progress, the rate at which new inventions and new capabilities are introduced, continually increases. One can find this law operating even in primitive technologies. For instance, the control of fire made possible the metallurgy of bronze and iron, which in turn enabled the invention of new and more sophisticated machines. But Kurzweil argues that this feedback phenomenon is especially marked with information technology. For instance, chip design software running on powerful computers enables the design of even more powerful chips. Thus each generation of computing technology is crucial to the design of the next.
Kurzweil concludes that in the near future this feedback process will cross a threshold where the technology becomes, in a sense, independent of its creators. Human designers will no longer need to play a role in the process, and computers (or more precisely, transhumans) will be able to continue their evolution on their own. This will free them (us) from the limits set by the fixed capacity of human nature.
What is wrong with this picture? Kurzweil is correct that technology has tremendous potential for further growth before it reaches fundamental limits set by the laws of physics. In a famous talk at Caltech in 1959 titled 'Plenty of Room at the Bottom', Richard Feynman showed that the amounts of information and computational capacity that can in principle be packed into a small space were vastly larger than the technology of the day allowed. In the nearly half-century since that talk, great progress has been made in reducing this gap but there is still much room for further improvements. Kurzweil may be too sanguine when he posits that subatomic particles will provide a basis for computation using features far smaller than atoms (most physicists do not foresee this happening anywhere outside of a neutron star), but he is correct that clever new ideas and steady engineering progress may be able some day to produce a pentium-class computer no larger than a grain of dust or a tiny robot the size of a human cell.
No, the problem with his prediction that human-level machine intelligence is right around the corner is not with the hardware but with the software. Kurzweil has fallen into the same error as Simon -- assuming that all that is needed to attain true intelligence in machines is to scale up existing systems a bit. In fact what is needed is a qualitative, not merely a quantitative leap. And no one at present knows how this can be done, or even if it can be done. If true AI is possible, achieving it will require profound new insights into the nature of intelligence. Such insights cannot come from machines that have not already achieved true intelligence: they will have to come from us plain old-fashioned humans. The technological feedback loop that Kurzweil is relying on will not get us past this obstacle.
Research in AI has indeed yielded many remarkable results, but always in circumscribed realms and with limited aims. Getting a computer to play chess at the grandmaster level was once regarded as a benchmark that would prove that it could think. Now that computers do play chess at that level, no one considers this a benchmark for intelligence any more. Computers do not play chess by understanding the game but primarily by searching massively among the possible moves and counter-moves to find the most promising one. Even for a seemingly simple task like reading text out of a page image (optical character recognition or OCR), computers have far higher error rates than grade-school children.
Philosophers such as Hubert Dreyfus, and even many AI researchers, notably Rodney Brooks, have argued that when humans tackle many, perhaps most, real-world cognitive tasks, they do not construct any formal theories or representations in their minds, but simply cope using low-level reactions to stimuli together with a store of implicit knowledge. If this is the case, then efforts to replicate human thinking by constructing computer models of representations of reality are doomed to failure. These efforts constitute the physical symbol-system approach to AI begun in the 1950s by researchers such as Simon, Allen Newell, John McCarthy and others.
Kurzweil recognises that the symbol-system approach has its limitations and that other strategies may be needed to achieve his goal. An alternative approach is the connectionist style of problem solving. A prime example of this style is the artificial neural network, a system of simplified simulated neurons connected together in a fashion that captures some of the features of biological nervous systems. Neural networks have proven remarkably successful in tackling pattern-matching problems like OCR that have resisted the symbol-system approach. However, they are unsatisfying to advocates of human-level AI for two reasons. First, although they are effective, they become so by a learning process that ends up obscuring how they actually achieve their results. Second, it is not clear how these sorts of systems can be adapted to more sophisticated tasks such as understanding language.
Kurzweil's favourite idea for making an end-run around the software problem is the brain simulator. After all, he argues, we have one working example of a design for an intelligent machine right between our ears. If we can reverse-engineer this design the way computer engineers figure out how their competitors' products work, we can build a working model, and then improve on it. Some progress on this project has already been made. Neurophysiologists have analysed the neural circuitry responsible for some low-level aspects of aural and visual perception, and have constructed computer models that reproduce the main features of these processes, including even illusions. However, this task will become progressively more complex as it works towards higher-level cognitive processes involving ever larger numbers of neurons cooperating in ever subtler interactions. A complete understanding of how the brain works is clearly not a near-term possibility, if it is possible at all.
In the end, one comes away from reading Kurzweil with the suspicion that he hopes mind will somehow simply emerge from the mechanism once the mechanism is sufficiently speedy and complex. Nearly 50 years after Simon's astonishing and embarrassing predictions, the secret of human intelligence and creativity remains as mysterious as ever, and as elusive to capture in a machine.
Associate Professor Bob Moniot teaches computer science at Fordham University in New York.
Chess Strategy
Fischer, who was reportedly paid a $20,000 appearance fee, later said Marcos had a good understanding of the game.
It seems we have a lot of chess playing presidents, as Corazon Aquino also plays the game and was thrilled when she met Garry Kasparov during the Manila Olympiad in 1992. Everybody, of course, knows Fidel Ramos is a good chess player and is also a benefactor of the game.
The late National Master Glicerio 'Asing' Badilles once confided to me that he was a favorite, together with IM Rodolfo Cardoso, of the late President Carlos Garcia, who was probably the strongest head of state to ever play the game.
RECORD FIELD. Another dedicated chess player among national leaders is Fidel Castro, whose passion for the game has made Cuba a chess power.
Cuba hosted the largest simultaneous exhibition in history, when 6,840 players including Castro played 380 masters in Havana in Nov. 19, 1966, the birthday of the late world champion Raoul Capablanca.
Muammar Gaddafi, another chess playing head of state, has been the leader of Libya since 1969. He provided the prize money in the World Championship in 2004, which became controversial when qualifiers from Israel were not given visas to Libya. This led to a boycott by several Jews from other countries and that is the biggest factor why Fide President Kirsan Ilyumzhinov almost failed to get re-elected in last month's Fide elections.
Yasser Arafat was chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization from 1969 until his death in Nov. 11, 2004. He was a co-recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize in 1994 together with Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin for the successful negotiations of the Oslo Accords. There is a story that he respected former Israeli Prime Minister Menachim Begin, because he was as a chess player like himself.
Begin is also a Nobel Peace prize awardee and became prime minister of Israel in 1977. Another story says that when British troops arrived at his house to arrest him in 1944, when Israel was still fighting for independence, Begin was playing chess with his wife and his last words to his wife was 'I resign,' before being dragged away. He played several matches with National Security adviser Zbigniew Brezezinski in Camp David and most probably also against president Jimmy Carter.
Vytautas Landsbergis was the first president of the state of Lithuania after the break-up of the Soviet Union in 1990. He is reportedly a strong chess player.
Boris Yeltsin was president of Russia from 1991-1999. An all-around athlete, Yeltsin is not only good in chess but also in boxing, gymnastics, volleyball, track and field and wrestling
There seems to be a connection between being president of the United States and knowing how to play chess. American presidents who play chess are Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, Woodrow Wilson, Theodore Roosevelt , Richard Nixon, James Garfield, Grover Cleveland, Ulysses Grant, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, James Monroe, Rutherford Hayes, Warren Harding, John Quincy Adams and Jimmy Carter. I will devote several articles in the future about these presidents and anecdotes about their game.
YOUNG ACE. Yves Fiel has certainly improved by leaps and bounds .Only 12 years old, he won the June edition tournament of the Cebu Executives and Professionals Chess Association .Last month's winner was Atty. Jongjong Melendez.
Chess Strategy
He said: "The only licence that appeared to cover us was a full casino licence but they are very restricted and anyway, that type of licence is for blackjack, roulette and all other games as well.
"We just want to play poker. We cater for the social player who doesn't want to play for high stakes and doesn't want to be in a gambling environment like a casino. I don't see why people who want to play poker and maybe win a maximum of ?0 in a night should have to go to a casino to do so."
He added: "The problem is that the Gaming Act came into force in 1968 when there were a huge amount of illegal casinos and when poker wasn't very popular. Poker has become the biggest card game on the planet in recent years and unfortunately the law hasn't caught up with that." After a year-long investigation by the Metropolitan Police and the Gambling Commission, Mr Kelly has been charged with breaching the Gaming Act and could face jail if he is found guilty. If he is acquitted, it could open the floodgates for pubs to run their own poker tournaments free of restrictions.
A central part of Mr Kelly's defence is expected to be that poker is a game of skill rather than luck and should be viewed like chess or bridge. "I think the Gambling Commission will have great difficulty in finding anyone who will take the stand to say that poker is not a game of skill," he said. "In any case, I don't think there is a single game that is purely about skill. Take chess; it comes down to skill but to start a game, you have to toss to decide who starts, so even then there is an element of gambling. How do you decide whether a game is say 43 per cent skill, or 60 per cent?"
The case is to be heard at Snaresbrook Crown Court in south-east London early next year. Insiders in the poker-playing community say there is something of a "free for all" among pubs running unlicensed poker tournaments while the law remains in limbo. The Commission is determined to crack down on the phenomenon and this week wrote to police, local authorities and licensing trade associations to remind them playing for money is illegal. Phill Brear, its director of operations, said: "We know that whereas it was hardly on the radar last year we are getting some very significant blips now.
Chess Strategy
LONDON, July 10 (UPI) -- The owner of a fashionable London pub has bet his business on the argument that poker is a game of skill, not chance.
Derek Kelly did not get a casino license when he opened the Gutshot in 2004, The Independent reported. But hundreds of people play poker there every week.
"We just want to play poker," Kelly said. "We cater for the social player who doesn't want to play for high stakes and doesn't want to be in a gambling environment like a casino."
Kelly argues that poker should be considered a game of skill like chess or checkers instead of being classified with roulette and blackjack. But he was recently charged with violations of the Gambling Act and is expected to go on trial early next year.
If Kelly makes his case, that would allow pubs all over Britain to host poker tournaments and allowing playing on the premises. If he loses, he could get a jail term.
"In a pub, people may get in over their heads, start playing for very high stakes and be exploited by far more experienced players," said Phill Brear, head of the Gambling Commission. "This is about protecting people."
Chess Strategy
Advertisement
Heroin deaths may set record
The young people kept coming at all times of the day during the past week, sitting around a table at the Gillis home to share photographs and stories. The parents took all of this in at a time when you might expect them to be unable to hold back tears. They were grieving in their own way.
Joan and Philip Gillis didn't shut the door to their Hanover home after their daughter, Holly, a 21-year-old woman described as beautiful, shy and sensitive, died of a heroin overdose one week ago. They opened it and were surrounded by their daughter's friends.
They listened to young people talk about how tough it is to be a teenager, to feel out of place at school, to be picked on by kids who are part of the so-called "in" crowd, to feel terrible pain and be unable to squelch it. They listened to some of them talk about the attraction of drugs, the sometimes fatal attraction of heroin. They listened to others who said they tried to talk Holly out of using drugs. They said they always held on to hope that Holly would stop using drugs, but the girl they raised died long ago, so by last week they seemed beyond tears.
"Two years ago, we mentally buried her, thinking we couldn't deal with it anymore," Joan Gillis said.
They had been grieving for years, sending their daughter to detox and drug rehab programs over and over, about 40 times by their recollection. They say many people in town don't seem to know there is a drug problem, and certainly not a heroin problem, in local schools. Most people sure don't talk about it.
That is why the Gillis family wanted to talk about it last week. They want people to know heroin is a big problem.
Their daughter had been using heroin since she was 16 and gave it to two younger brothers. A group of young people sitting at the Gillis home last week were asked how many ever used heroin.
Four raised their hands.
Morris County Prosecutor Michael Rubbinaccio last week acknowledged that Holly Gillis was one of two young women to die of apparent drug overdoses in Hanover in recent weeks. He said another apparent overdose death occurred in Wharton last month.
Authorities said they are waiting for toxicology reports on all three recent deaths. They report that, in addition to those three suspected drug deaths, there have been 15 confirmed overdose deaths in the county this year, including a teenager from East Hanover, with eight involving heroin.
That appears to be a record-setting pace, ahead of last year's 22 overdose deaths for the entire year and the 24 deaths recorded in 2000, which authorities said was a record at the time.
Yet, Rubbinaccio was saying last week that there is no heroin epidemic.
Reporting deaths
John Dangler, his predecessor, made a point of publicizing every heroin death starting in the late 1990s because, he said, he wanted Morris County residents to know the drug had made its way to the suburbs. His office reported 19 heroin-related deaths in 1998 and the same number in 2000 when law enforcement authorities were saying heroin was a huge problem. Now, without that kind of publicity, it appears that some people have been lulled into believing heroin has gone away.
Some people posting on a Hanover Township Web site last week seemed surprised that drugs are such a big problem. It seemed few heard about the first death in Hanover last month, at least not until a week ago, after Holly Gillis was found lying on her basement floor.
Gillis' parents have made a point of talking about their daughter. They don't want her death to be forgotten. They want people to read about it, to ask questions, to talk to their children.
"We want something to happen," said Philip Gillis.
Rubbinaccio did not fully explain why he doesn't make a point of publicizing heroin deaths, as Dangler had. He said he doesn't want to release information about drug deaths until after he gets toxicology reports. But even then, the prosecutor's office hasn't exactly been going out of its way to let people know how many people are dying from overdoses.
Rubbinaccio did make a point of announcing last week that heroin containing a painkiller called fentanyl, a potentially lethal additive, has been found in Morris County.
"I like to put out specific information when we have a public health threat," he explained.
So why not publicize all drug overdoses?
Rubbinaccio said there is no evidence of a growing epidemic. He may not want to frighten people. But you could argue that people should be frightened when two young women die in the same town weeks apart, and when a teenager from the same area died not long ago.
Decade-long problem
Not that the problem is focused on any one part of Morris County. Rubbinaccio pointed out that the 22 deaths last year occurred in 15 towns. He may be right when he says the problem is not growing, even if the number of deaths appear to be this year. But heroin has been a big suburban problem for about a decade, and Rubbinaccio said last week that he would consider doing more to make drug deaths public.
Joe Hennen, who runs Daytop, a Mendham drug treatment center for young people, said this past week that the heroin problem peaked about four years ago in Morris County and has not been getting worse. But he added that almost half the young people in his treatment program have used heroin, and the number of female addicts has been growing.
The problem isn't a sudden surge in heroin use, he said. The problem is that heroin use hasn't subsided.
"It peaked and leveled off at a very high level," Hennen, who was in Canada on vacation, said by phone.
'Still an epidemic'
"It is still an epidemic. ...Heroin is no longer on the front page, and people would like to believe it's not there. But it's a major issue."
Hennen pointed out that most parents do not want the death of a child publicized, and that law enforcement officials have to weigh public awareness against being sensitive to grieving parents. The result has been that heroin seemed to disappear from the front pages, and people seemed to forget that it is a problem, even while young people have been dying.
Joan Gillis was saying last week that she didn't know about heroin a few years ago, when she learned that her daughter was using the drug. She said she didn't know how often her daughter used heroin, and didn't understand the nature of the addiction.
Intense high
Kids who use heroin have said they always chase a more intense high, always look for a more potent drug, and it doesn't matter that using heroin makes them throw up. Joan Gillis said she thought people who used heroin simply were able to quit using.
"That's funny," one of the young people sitting in her living room said.
Holly Gillis' parents talked about their daughter's chaotic life, how she was banned from three psychiatric hospitals, how she was diagnosed as bipolar but no one ever seemed able to treat her mental health and drug problems at the same time. They dragged her to hospitals that couldn't keep her against her will.
Her friends talked about her wild side, and about her gentle side, about how she would go to Newark to buy drugs and bring ice cream to hand out to the neighborhood children. Some of her friends said they stopped coming around because it was too painful to deal with her addiction. They said she wanted to stop doing drugs, that she didn't want to hurt her parents. She overdosed so many times that her friends and relatives lost count.
"She died a lot," said Tom Gillis, 18, her brother.
At age 14
Tom Gillis said he started using heroin, which he got from his sister, when he was 14. He once told a close female friend that drugs were more important to him than she was. Yet he said he was able to stop using after about a year, replacing drugs with intensive reading of classic literature. He now attends CCM and is considering becoming a psychologist because he wants the world to understand "how hard it is to live as a teenager."
He said his sister was born different, that she was ultra-sensitive, and Joan Gillis said her daughter lived life intensely. Holly Gillis' friends say she thought she was ugly, although she was beautiful. She thought she was fat, even when she was thin. She loved Boy George because she related to the pain, and loved Marilyn Monroe for the same reason. She was smart, they said, and able to read and play chess before she went to kindergarten. She had high SAT scores, they said, and so much promise.
"She was heaven and hell, intensity beyond belief," Joan Gillis said.
Her parents were still trying to understand her pain last week. They were talking to young people about what it is like to be young. They were talking to newspaper reporters because they were wondering where all the headlines about heroin had gone. They wanted their daughter's death to be public. They wanted people to know who she was, how she died, and that heroin has been in the suburbs for years, killing young people, even if you haven't been reading about it.
Abbott Koloff can be reached at (973) 989-0652 or akoloff@gannett.com.
Gannett Home | Gannett Foundation | Gannett Newspapers
Chess Strategy
Online Poll
[poll]
-->
[adsys_ad::top]
-->
THE VILLAGES ' Clyde Robinson is familiar with intrigue. He's no stranger to the machinations of kings, queens, and bishops. He knows the importance of a minor character, a pawn, if you will, to his overall strategy. If successful, Robinson will topple an empire. If his opponent finds a hidden weakness, Robinson will be checkmated and forced off the field of battle.
No, the Orange Blossom Gardens resident wasn't a spy and isn't a writer of spy thrillers. Instead, Robinson helps to run the chess games from 9 a.m. to noon Mondays and Fridays at the Silverlake Center.
When asked how long he had been playing the game, Robinson gave a smile and shook his head, saying, 'I'd rather you didn't ask that. I will say that I was 5 or 6 years old when my father taught me and my brothers to play.' He did reveal later that he's been playing the 600-year-old game for about eight decades.
'I played (grandmaster and former world chess champion) Bobby Fischer once,' Robinson said, the memory bringing a proud grin. 'I'll give you one guess who won. I gave him a good game, was ahead of him for a few moves, but it's like tug-of-war ' the biggest player wins.'
Robinson added that he played several U.S. champions as part of an exhibition.
'It was one of those exhibitions where the champions would play several players at once. Of course, they'd walk up to the board, make a move and go to the next board while you had time to look things over. It was a good way to see the knowledge and ability of champions,' Robinson said.
While many think the game of chess is all in the mind, Tom Barton and Chuck Stansburge, playing at the next table, demonstrated that some good, old-fashioned psych-out techniques have their place at the board.
'Well, yeah, you could do that,' Barton said in a 'do you really want to do that' tone as Stansburge placed a piece.
Stansburge, for his part would softly hum 'Entrance of the Gladiators,' the familiar bouncy circus theme song, every time he made a move.
Both experienced players shrugged off the other's off-board gambits, and concentrated on the game, calling Robinson over once in a dispute over an 'en passant' move. 'En passant' refers to a not-often-done maneuver when a pawn captures an opposing pawn when it avoided capture by moving two squares. The move is the only time in chess in which a piece captures but does not move to the square of the captured piece. The rules are as complicated as it sounds, and it took several demonstrations by both players of the moves leading up to the dispute before Robinson could give a ruling.
Barton learned to play the game in college, something he says was, 'a good many years ago.'
Stansburge, a life member of the U.S. Chess Federation makes his own ceramic chess sets.
While some members of the group have impressive chess credentials, Robinson says the club is, 'social, recreational chess.' There are no dues to play.
'There's no question we try to win, but we have a good time and playing the game is the No. 1 reason for being here,' Robinson said.
'One of the reasons the game has been so popular for so long is that there is nobody, without any question who is unbeatable. You never know how the game will turn out,' Robinson said.
Donna Riley-Lein is a reporter for the Daily Sun. She can be reached at 753-1119, ext. 9255, or donna.riley-lein
Chess Strategy
ESB: Hey Alicia! First thing's first, how did you ever wind up fighting in North Korea? Did you approach them or did they contact you?
Alicia: I got a call from the WBC to set up the fight, which is generally what happens for me.
ESB: Are Americans even allowed into North Korea or were you just a one-time exception?
Alicia: That actually was a special occasion. That was the only time they were accepting Americans into the country because they were celebrating their 60th anniversary of their independence from Japan. So they had a celebration lasting a few months and they opened visas to the U.S. for a couple of American citizens.
Alicia: We flew'yeah' we couldn't fly directly, so we actually flew to South Korea, and then they don't have a flight to North Korea, so we had to fly to China and then to North Korea. That must have been at least a day's travel. 16 hours to South Korea, and then 6 from there to China, then, finally, we got there.
Then when we got there, we had to give up our passports, cell phones (laughing), just had to give up everything. You couldn't make calls there, you couldn't travel without the group.
ESB: Yeah, I think your brother almost forgot to give up the phone and had to go back?
Alicia: It was at the airport, we had to give up our passports and phones to the head of the group. I don't know'I mean, I have NO IDEA what they did with that stuff.
ESB: Were you at all afraid that with North Korea's reputation, something bad could happen to you or your team?
Alicia: Actually, I wasn't; I mean, that is the one thing everybody asks me about and truth is, they were very respectful; they didn't get in the way. There were about four of us from the U.S., anyway.
Alicia: My trainer and brother Devon, and I had another corner person, and a WBC official.
Alicia: Pyongyang, which is their capital, and we stayed at a hotel there, and other than the first night, when they had a performance that we all went to, I really didn't travel, cause I was there to fight.
Alicia: I think we stayed two, three days. We got in, the next day was the weigh in, and then the next day we fought and then after that, we left. So, I really wasn't there to be social. I really didn't have time to be social, it took a lot of time for me to get acclimated because I was traveling so much, so that really took a lot out of me.
Alicia: They had a performance that had like one hundred thousand participants, and it was totally synchronized. It was beautiful, like, you know, at the Superbowl, where you have everyone doing the same thing? Well, they are doing the same thing for an entire hour! They generally had at least fifteen to twenty thousand people on the field. It was a huge open air arena, and you had people going on and off, synchronized, doing different designs, flowers, acrobatics. It really was beautiful and they had kids, too. I hear it took them six months for them to set that up. I think they couldn't even get all those people in the same school to practice it, so they did it in different locations and then synchronized it, probably.
Alicia: There actually wasn't a lot. When we came in that first evening, it seemed very desolate, and the one or two days I went out, it was the same, no cars on the road. There it is a lot more walking or public transportation.
ESB: Ok, let's talk about the fight. Were there elaborate entrances with music and what not?
Alicia: Not really, everything was straightforward, other than them playing the American anthem for me. I don't even remember, and for me, I don't have a fight song (chuckles). I usually just tell people to play what they want. So, they might have played some music when I walked in but I just don't recall.
Still, they were extremely respectful, like I didn't get any boos when I walked in. You get that a lot in the States (laughing) or in other places, if they want to only cheer for the hometown person.
ESB: Interesting. I was going to ask if they cheered for you at all?
Alicia: No, not cheering, but they did actually clap, and you know they didn't boo.
ESB: Well, can you tell us about the fight? Is it safe to assume you were robbed?
Alicia: It is safe to say there is a lot of favoritism (chuckling), as there generally is in boxing. There were three things that happened: one, was that I knocked her down, maybe in the third, and they ruled it a slip; Then another was she pushed my head down and they took a point away from me!
Alicia: Yeah, saying that my head is down, and I am like, 'What are you talking about?' and, I mean, even if my head is down, first you give a warning. So that also changed the fight. Then, another thing, was when I had her on the ropes, the ref came and broke it up, and I am like, 'ok, why?' (laughing)
Alicia: No, it wasn't a clinch, I was throwing punches, she is on the ropes and he came and separated us, so there were definitely instances of bias. You know, fact of the matter is, this ref was from China, and after the fight, any time, cause he traveled with the group from China, he would see me, like at the hotel, he would avoid looking at me and he would always apologize.
Alicia: Yeah, apologize, for the fight. So, it's like 'ok, yeah, that is all good and well, but, it's like, (laughing) we know this is how it has to be, if you come back here,' yet, that is not doing me any good, cause now I have this loss, that I know I didn't deserve.
ESB: So basically, it was your fight, like you dominated all the way?
Alicia: Yeah, it was, you know what I think, it just would have been a really good fight.
ESB: Was it considered a big event, sort of like America vs. North Korea?
Alicia: Actually, I don't think they really played up America versus North Korea, they really didn't play it up. I think it was just like a big event, because it was the first title fight that they were having in North Korea, and having like one of their fighters challenge for a world championship.
ESB: Give us your thoughts about the country? Is it as bad as they say? Better, worse?
Alicia: I really didn't see much, I didn't get a chance to travel. The group did they went into town to shop, they went to some temple in the mountains. So, I didn't get to see any of the country at all.
Alicia: My brother did go but I am not sure if he went into town. He might have, though. He didn't go to the temple either cause that was an hour ride and if I was going to stay, he would make sure I trained.
Alicia: Oh, they had a room where I could work the pads and there was a treadmill and an open area, so I had a chance to do some work.
Alicia: It's never a worthwhile purse for females (laughing). I think I made five thousand.
Alicia: No, that is just generally what they pay women, but it's not necessarily good. I mean, Laila Ali walks in and because of her name, for a four round fight, she would make twenty five thousand dollars and that is obviously a major difference. Then people who are in the game, who are world champions? Like if I was a male and a champion, there is no way I wouldn't be making six figures.
I am a three-time world champion and I am not even making five figures and that is the name of the game for female boxers. You ask any female boxer and they have a full time job. Any woman who does boxing has to do it for the love of the sport, cause you can't really make a living at it.
ESB: WOW! I mean, like Leyla (Leidecker, not Ali) told me you were making like 200 bucks a fight.
Alicia: Well, generally, it is $200 a round, even in the States. It says in the contract that you get paid $200 based on the number of rounds the fight is scheduled for. So, say a 4 round fight is 800 dollars, even if I knock her out in the first.
ESB: Ok, well compared to North Korea, China seems almost like an after thought. Still, that is not a conventional place to fight, either.
Alicia: No, it isn't. Actually, I think that was the first one (i.e. title fight) they put on there, too. It was a very big event; a lot of press for it. There, I got to travel a lot, and be more sociable cause I went there earlier, which I was happy about, cause it gave me more time to get acclimated. We socialized more because everybody was at the same hotel, and we ate in the same room, and they took us to see the Pandas and shopping, and so it was a more social event in that sense.
Alicia: Yeah, they had training facilities at the hotel, but I didn't spar. I generally don't spar the week I am about to fight.
Alicia: I was there about a week. Usually, it takes about two days to get used to the time change. So the first day, I was sleeping trying to wake up at their time, then the next day, I worked out a little bit and for a few more days.
ESB: So it was more relaxed there. I mean, I know you had to stay with a driver in North Korea, right?
Alicia: The one thing is in North Korea, you had to go as a group everywhere; you couldn't go, say, shopping by yourself. In China, though, it was like, 'here is your hotel card, here is a map, we can take you into town, you can take a taxi back,' so we were able to come and go as we pleased.
ESB: You obviously fought in a lot of places, so where would you want to fight that you haven't fought in yet?
Alicia: I don't know just cause, I might as well get to travel (chuckling). There and the Phillipines, cause I know they put on quite a bit of fights there. I also think they have a few female fighters. So, those are the two places that are very interesting.
ESB: Well, I know you are from Jamaica, so would you like to fight there?
Alicia: Oh, Sure, I would love to fight in Jamaica, to get that hometown crowd. It's the same thing, I have yet to fight in New York City. Traveled all over but I have yet to fight here. It's not our fault, though, cause we have been trying to get on a promoter's card here but it just doesn't seem to work. It's easier to get a fight in Vegas then here.
ESB: Well, that is what I wanted to ask cause you usually fight their hometown stars, but can you get a tomato can or something for a local fight or is that not fulfilling?
Alicia: Yeah, it's possible; the thing is, I don't want a tomato can. Especially in New York, my hometown, I want to showcase my skills and it won't do me any good if I get someone I can just walk in and knock out. None of my fights have been that way, because from my first pro fight, I've been fighting champions.
ESB: Yeah, I mean, it is hard to follow female boxing, but even so, there are many recognizable names on your record.
Alicia: I've always tried to fight the best, even if my record is not great, I can always say I fought the top fighters. Even though you look at the records of the girls in China and North Korea, you have to remember they had extensive amateur careers. So, it's not, 'oh, she was only 2 and 0,' because they actually had more fights than I had, because they had a much longer amateur career than I did.
So, I know going to these places, that I will get tough fights and that is the kind of opponent I want to have in New York. Sure, I would love to have an advantage, but that is what having hometown fans is supposed to give you.
ESB: Now, when you are not fighting in different countries, you fight in different weight classes?
Alicia: Well, I started out as a featherweight, and I actually went up in weight to fight a couple of people, which was not a good thing to do, because you don't have the power, because they are coming down from a higher weight class.
I think when I fought for my first title, I weighed in at 122 and my trainer said you can fight for a title at that weight, and I got the opportunity to fight at that weight and that was my second title shot. When I weighed in for that, I weighed 119, and then they told me, 'I could make 118' (laughing), and by doing that, we figured out that was my best weight. I mean, I fought at 115, too, but my natural weight is 118. I walk around at 121, so its no big deal to get down to that. I haven't really gone up since I made that track down.
ESB: Yeah, I was going to ask how high would you be willing to go up in weight? Can we expect Alicia Ashley vs Vonda Ward?
Alicia: No, that doesn't make any sense. I spar with guys all the time but, I mean, it doesn't make any sense. What good is it going to do? It's going to be viewed as a side show, a freak show, so its not worth it.
Alicia: Yeah, I went to training camp with him. Juan Guzman, who just fought on the De la Hoya card. Oh, also, there was one guy, forgot his name'I think, I sparred with Vivian Harris and Agapito Sanchez. Raul Frank, who trains here at the gym. So, I sparred with a lot of the guys.
Alicia: Yeah, you know, they don't take it easy on me (laughing), which I am happy about, because I hate it when guys are like, 'ok, it's a female, let me hold my punches back.' They don't, they really respect me; they know I can hit back, also.
ESB: Which boxers, if any, are you friends with outside the ring?
Alicia: I don't know. I really don't speak to anyone outside of the gym.
Alicia: The one that I like is a very complete fighter. Well, maybe not that complete, but, Belinda Laracuente, and she fought Christy Martin before, when she was very young, and she is also a traveler. I like her, stylewise, and for me, that is more important. For instance, I like Floyd Mayweather, Jr., as a male boxer and before that, I really liked Roy Jones, Jr., because of the styles they have.
ESB: Yes, I was going to ask who are your favorite male fighters. So, Mayweather and Jones?
Alicia: Yeah. Don't really like the heavyweights because there is not much movement to them. I like the lighter weight classes, usually, except before, for Jones. Mosley used to be my favorite, too.
Alicia: Actually, no. Mosley came to the gym, but I wasn't there for that. Mayweather, I met his father and uncle, because I went to Vegas to fight and ended up going to that gym. His father, actually, complemented me, in saying I fight like his son (laughing), so that was a very nice thing, so I was like, 'oh, thank you.'
ESB: Wow! That is pretty wild. Do you think there are any big fights out there in the world of female boxing like Megafights?
Alicia: I think there can be because there are a lot of women that have been in the game for a while. People in the game know them and if you put them on, it will be a really good match up. I mean, you got Laila Ali that is fighting all these girls, but not Ann Wolfe and that would be a great fight. Chevelle Halback, I think she went to Canada and fought, but the fighter who she ended up fighting, was kind of crappy. Trying to think of somebody in her weight class for her to fight. Still, there are a lot of people, where if you put up the experience versus the experience, it will be exciting.
Alicia: I really don't think there is anybody in my weight class that I would have to worry about.
ESB: Obviously, many of your losses were most likely robberies. Which opponents did you really feel you lost to, if any?
Alicia: Out of all those officially, there is three fights that I really believe I actually lost. One was definitely to Hallback; that was a stupid fight to do (laughing), cause she was a powerhouse, and I went up two weight classes, so that was extremely stupid. Laura Serrano, was and is, well, I don't know if she is still fighting, a phenomenal fighter and that one I think I took on my third fight or fourth fight, and she won, definitely. I can't remember the third one.
Alicia: No, the crowd thought I won that one, actually, cause she was extremely bloodied up when we were finished.
Alicia: Well, that one was pretty close and I couldn't say, but it could have gone either way. And I think she got it cause it was in her hometown.
Alicia: Definitely the Hallback fight, cause she can really hit, most definitely. Serrano, I think, because she was such a complete fighter, that she can catch you from anywhere, cause she had such great combinations. But Hallback, you just have to watch out for bombs. So, if you could stay away and run around the ring, (laughing) then you can survive, which is what I basically ended up doing, anyway. Serrano was just a complete fighter, she had combos, movement. She wasn't that hard a puncher but she definitely knew what she was doing.
Alicia: Definitely Elena Reid cause that was my only stoppage win.
ESB: Now she is actually somewhat known. Was she a good fighter?
Alicia: She was a good fighter but she was the kind that was used to somebody just standing there. So, from watching a tape of her, you could see she did the same thing over and over, because if you stood in front of her, she threw a lot and if you didn't, she would be in trouble. With me, I am the type of fighter that moves, and once she got frustrated, that was it; And she got frustrated after the first round.
ESB: Now you are also a dancer since age 6. How has that helped in boxing?
Alicia: Well, it made me more of a boxer, because I could move, like the slips that I do. Actually, a lot of people see that in my boxing straight away, they say, 'oh, you move like a dancer,' and I say, 'yeah, I danced for 15 years (laughing).' Definitely, it lets me move easier because with a lot of people, you really have to work for them to move, to get out of the way to use their legs, you know. So it just helps a lot, which by the way, is why I don't get a lot of knockouts, because I am always moving.
Alicia: Exactly, you have to really stand there, plant your feet to get a knockout going. It's something I have been working on; how to get the body shots going, so I have been getting a lot stronger. But still, you want to be able to fall back on mobility, to get out of trouble and not having people be able to get those strong shots on you cause you are standing right there.
Alicia: Yes. I have a second-degree black belt. I had gotten injured while I was dancing, and I messed up my knee, so I couldn't dance anymore, so for exercise, I started doing Karate, cause my brother did Karate for a long time. So, I actually did it for exercise, and because I was such a performer, I started doing tournaments and that is how I ended up doing kickboxing because the Karate tournaments for me started getting boring, so I went to the next thing. In my third amateur kickboxing match, I fought a boxer, so she had the hands and I had the feet, and the reason I won was because I had the much better feet. She really had to come in and I was able to keep her off, although when she got me into a corner, I didn't know what to do, which is why I ended up taking boxing, so I could get better at kickboxing.
ESB: Of the three, which is the toughest if you would have learned each separately without knowing the others and why?
Alicia: The hardest would be kickboxing because you have to have hands and feet, so it takes a lot more out of you then boxing does. With Karate, you can just use your feet the whole time.
ESB: How did you end up getting a role in the film 'Girlfight'?
Alicia: Actually, Michelle Rodriguez came here to train for the three months before the filming started. So we sparred quite a bit, cause she was training at that time with my trainer, Hector Roca, and when the movie people said, 'oh, we have to find you an opponent,' she suggested me, 'oh, like I have been sparring with this girl and we work pretty well together.' So, I was just in the right place at the right time.
ESB: Did you like how they handled the boxing aspect of that film?
Alicia: Actually, yes, well at least my scene with her cause we worked on choreographing it. I didn't like the premise of it cause she had to fight all these guys. So, ok, whatever. The stunt coordinator, that worked on the boxing, worked on a lot of combinations, then later, he said, 'this isn't sparring right now, we will film and when I say, 'go,' you do your combinations,' and so it worked pretty well.
ESB: Is that your favorite movie about boxing and if not which is and why?
Alicia: My favorite boxing movie? Actually, I don't have one. I only watched Rocky, maybe five years ago and I was unimpressed (laughing). I haven't seen, like, Hurricane or any of the other ones. A lot of them are, like, which was the one with Russell Crowe last year, that was ok. The thing is, it's the same reason I don't play boxing video games, because I am in it. So if I do it, it's really no fun to watch it and play it, cause If I am watching it, I am going to critique it, like, 'you could see that they are not hitting each other,' or 'this punch was all the way over here,' and the camera angles they do, are not even close, so there is not much enjoyment in that.
Alicia: (laughing) Oh, no, I don't want to sit down and criticize; I like to enjoy my movie.
Alicia: I'm in, 'Strangers with Candy,' which is supposed to come out next month and that is a comedy. It was a series on Comedy Central and they made it into a feature length movie. I filmed that almost like, 2 years and it's finally getting distributed, and they had the premier last week, and I am like, in one of the opening scenes, where it's a major fight scene, when she is in jail.
Alicia: Yeah, I argue with her and we get into a big fight.
Alicia: Well, I am doing some auditions now, but I don't know what will come of it.
ESB: Lets talk a bit about your family. Your trainer is your brother, Devon. If you saw the Trinidad - Wright fight, Papa Trinidad Sr. seemed, in my opinion, to be sugarcoating the fight in between rounds for his son. Has this ever happened, where your brother was not entirely honest with you in this regard?
Alicia: Oh, NO, NO! (laughing) He will say to me, like, 'I think you lost that round,' or 'you have to do more,' so he will never sugarcoat it. He has never done that cause that is the type of person I am; like I will come into the corner already thinking, I did crappy, but he will say, 'that was a good round,' and I am like, 'What?' (laughing) 'I thought I did horrible.' There are times when he goes 'you won that,' and I don't feel like I did anything, but I trust what he says.
Alicia: Yes. Later, I will watch the tape and go, 'oh, I didn't think I did this good throwing so many uppercuts and body shots.' He generally tells me.
Alicia: Most of the time, I just listen, unless I don't understand what he is saying. Plus, I can also hear him when I am in the ring.
ESB: Do you think it is easier or harder to have family in the corner as trainers, sort of like with Chris Byrd, the Klitschko's, and Trinidad?
Alicia: For me, it has been ok; I don't think it's harder in any way. I mean, he knows me pretty well. He is the oldest brother, so I don't have any like sibling rivalry (laughing), cause there is such a big age difference, you know, like 9 years. So, he has always been the older brother and I am just used to listening to him.
ESB: Your other brother, Maurice Ashley, is the first black grandmaster in chess. Who is better, you at Chess or him at boxing?
Alicia: (Laughing) Probably equally horrible. (laughing) I would say, me, because I at least know the moves. (Laughing) He doesn't know boxing at all; I don't even think he knows what a jab is.
Alicia: Only a couple of my amateur fights, the one or two at the Garden he has been to. All my pro fights have been away, so he hasn't been to my pro fights. We are really trying to get a pro fight in New York, cause just the people at the gym would be a huge crowd.
ESB: Did you hear about the new sport of ChessBoxing in Europe?
ESB: Yeah, it's like alternating rounds and you can win by checkmate or knockout.
Alicia: (laughing) I don't think they have much to do with themselves over there.
ESB: You would never compete in something like that if Maurice trained you?
Alicia: (laughing) No, I think they would checkmate me, although if we boxed first?
ESB: (Laughing) Yeah, I mean, there is a lot of strategy involved in that. Would your parents rather have had another chess player in the family or another boxer?
Alicia: My mom, she has never seen me boxing; actually, she has never seen me in karate, either, but she is very proud of me and what I have done. So they are happy, you know. She is a world champion here, and he is a grand master there, so they are happy in that sense.
ESB: Which boxer do you think would make a good chess player with the right training and why?
Alicia: Mayweather because I think he uses strategy a lot. When he went in to fight Gatti, people expected him to run around and he didn't. He comes out and surprises you, and now people know he is not just a mover and he can stand there and fight. So he employs strategy and that is what you need in chess.
Alicia: Well, now I just train people. I have a degree in Computer Science and I used to be a computer support technician, and then I ended up doing life insurance, cause I wanted more time to train, and then I ended up doing paralegal work. Last year, though, I just took time off and got a lot more clients and now I am able to just train people and work out and fight.
Alicia: It's a lot more white-collar people then anything. There are one or two women, who will be competing in the golden gloves, but I don't know what their aspirations are beyond that. Majority are white collar, though.
Alicia: Big movie buff. There are days when I go and see three movies at the theaters. I have a group of friends I grew up with, and that I have known for 20 or so years that I generally hang out with.
Alicia: All kinds. I mean, I am part of the screen actors guild, so I get a lot of their Oscar worthy movies, that before, I would not have spent my money to see, but because I was able to see them I got an appreciation for all kinds of movies. So, I like everything except, like, gangster movies.
Alicia: My all time favorite is the 'Princess Bride.' Also, the one with Michelle Pfeiffer and Rutger Hauer' 'LadyHawke.' I like cartoons, too.
Alicia: Animation, like finding Nemo. Oh, and I like 'X-Men.'
Alicia: That, too, I like quite a bit, except for Rock, and I am not really a metal head or techno. You know, I am Jamaican, so got to listen to the reggae, and R & B, not so much rap, because I can't understand a lot of it (laughing) cause I can't understand it, but the music in itself, like the beats for rap, I really like, so more of that, than Hardcore rap. Also, old fashioned country, like Kenny Rogers. Also, I like James Ingram, Whitney in her heyday, Kelly Clarkson, Christina Aguilera. Oh, and like Mariah in her heyday, later, she is more pop, although she still has the voice, but she doesn't use it in her music as much.
Alicia: Definitely trying to get that fight in New York, so that fans can really see me other than on TV. I really want everyone to come when I do get my fight in New York. I am just happy to have the support that I do.
Thanks a lot to Alicia for sharing her time with us and here is to hoping some New York promoter is reading this and looking to get a hold of Alicia for that big MSG bout.
previous article: My Message to "Woeful" Danny Williams: "Retire son. You are Done"
Chess Strategy
In 1956, a group of computer scientists gathered at Dartmouth College to delve into a brand-new topic: artificial intelligence.
The summer rendezvous in the Connecticut River Valley town of Hanover, New Hampshire, served as a springboard for discussions on ways that machines could simulate aspects of human cognition: How can computers use language? Can machines improve themselves? Is randomness a factor in the difference between creative thinking and unimaginative competent thinking?
The underlying assumption was that, in principle, learning and other aspects of human intelligence could be described precisely enough that a machine could be programmed to simulate it.
Principal figures at the Dartmouth conference included such notables as Marvin Minsky, then of Harvard University; Claude Shannon of Bell Laboratories; Nathaniel Rochester of IBM; and Dartmouth's own John McCarthy.
It was McCarthy who put the name "artificial intelligence" to the field of study, just ahead of the conference. With Dartmouth hosting a 50th anniversary conference this month, McCarthy ' now a professor emeritus at Stanford University ' spoke about the early expectations for AI, the accomplishments since then and what remains to be done.
Q: You're credited with coining the term "artificial intelligence" just in time for the 1956 conference. Were you just putting a name to existing ideas, or was it something new that was in the air at that time?
A: Well, I came up with the name when I had to write the proposal to get research support for the conference from the Rockefeller Foundation. And to tell you the truth, the reason for the name is, I was thinking about the participants rather than the funder. What's needed is to figure out good ways of constructing new ideas from old ones.
Claude Shannon and I had done this book called Automata Studies, and I had felt that not enough of the papers that were submitted to it were about artificial intelligence, so I thought I would try to think of some name that would nail the flag to the mast.
And looking back, do you think that that's the right term? It seems fairly self-evident, but would there be a better way to describe this kind of research?
Well, there are some people who want to change the name to "computational intelligence"... It seems to me I couldn't have used (that term in 1955) because the idea that computers would be the main vehicle for doing AI was far from unanimous. In fact, it would have been a minority view at that time.
At the time, in that proposal, you had said (about using computers to simulate the higher functions of the brain) that "the major obstacle is not the lack of machine capacity but our inability to write programs taking full advantage of what we have". So the machinery was there, but the programming skills weren't?
It wasn't a question of skills, it was a question of basic ideas, and it still is. One of them that comes up very clearly is when you compare how well computers play chess with how badly they play Go, in spite of comparable effort having been put in. The reason is that in Go, you have to consider the situation, the position... and furthermore, you have to identify the parts ' and how to do that isn't well understood, even yet.
So the attendees in 1956 ' and I'm sure you, too ' were very optimistic about what could be done by, say, the 1970s with chess playing, composing classical music, understanding speech. How far did we get in the 50 years? Were the initial expectations too optimistic?
Mine were, certainly. I think there were some others there who were rather pessimistic.
Well, the thing is, you can only take into account the obstacles that you know about, and we know about more than we knew then.
What are some of the big things that have been learned over the last 50 years that have helped shape research in artificial intelligence?
Well, I suppose one of the big things was the recognition that computers would have to do nonmonotonic reasoning.
In ordinary logical deduction, if, say, you have a sentence P that is deducible from a collection of sentences ' call it A ' and we have another collection of sentences B, which includes all the sentences of A, then it will still be deducible from B because the same proof will work. However, humans do reasoning in which that is not the case. Suppose I said, "Yes, I will be home at 11 o'clock, but I won't be able to take your call". Then the first part, "I will be home at 11 o'clock," ' you would conclude that I could take your call, but then if I added the "but" phrase, then you would not draw that conclusion.
So nonmonotonic reasoning is where you draw a conclusion, which may be a correct conclusion to draw, but it isn't guaranteed to be true...
To the demo>>
Estimate your enterprise's savings with Intel? vPro? technology
ROI Estimator>>
Interview with Hannes Schwaderer, Managing Director of Intel Germany
Chess Strategy
I
don't have a clue what "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest" would be like if it weren't for the inspiration of "Raiders of the Lost Ark" and "Pitfall."
You swing on ropes over lava pits like in "Pitfall." You run through caverns and along ledges where boulders roll at you, just like in "Raiders." And by the way, if hero pirate Jack Sparrow wore less eyeliner, he could pass as Christina Aguilera.
It's a real boon for "Pirates" -- a good but repetitive action game -- to have signed up charming Johnny Depp to speak voiceovers for Jack, the drunken adventurer he plays in the movies. When he stabs a killer zombie to death, he smells its rot and says, "And I thought they smelled bad on the outside." Not a great line, but Depp makes a chuckle of it.
Only occasionally does a game sign up such a serious actor. Most notably, Samuel L. Jackson did forceful work in "The Incredibles" and "Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas." It doesn't take a famous actor to make a role sing. If I could induct one actor into a gaming Hall of Fame, my nominee would be James McCaffrey, who voiced deep, disaffected sadness and anger into the noir detective of "Max Payne" games.
In the case of "Pirates," Depp makes it more passable. Half the fun is moving Depp's performance-driven sway, while he swordfights and drunkenly stumbles past those "Raiders"-ish boulders and "Pitfall"-esque lava pits. Without the Depp-contorted body movements and voiceovers, it would just be a game where you press two buttons over and over to stab people in the ribs.
Acting isn't everything. To the contrary, the smaller-marquee game, "Field Commander," has no good voice acting, and it reeks of terrible dialogue, but the war action is so engrossing it keeps me awake till 5 a.m. trying to conquer battlefields.
I can't even believe I like "Field Commander." It's a strategy, role-playing game, my least favorite genre. I prefer to play games where I get to do the first-person shooting. But "Field Commander" makes the most of its role-playing with a chesslike intrigue. You position tanks, troops and helicopters on a field. Your opponent -- another player, or the computer -- tries to outmaneuver you.
You move snipers and soldiers only a few steps at a time, like pawns. You drive tanks farther distances, like rooks or knights. And helicopters zoom over the landscape, like queens. You protect your headquarters, try to invade enemy headquarters, and blow up rival tanks and soldiers.
The reason "Field Commander" works, when many other role-playing games do not, is its ease of taut action. Unlike chess, it's not very difficult to get a grasp of complex movements. It might take a few attempts before you figure out how to win. But it's very satisfying to grasp victory at the last second, just when you think you're about to get creamed by a rocket launcher.
You just have to put up with the occasional bad dialogue from some actor the game booklet doesn't even name. It's like this: "You may have won this time, but I assure you, it won't be so easy next time!" Ugh. Where is Johnny Depp when you need him?
|
Search This Site
Syndicate this blog site
Powered by BlogEasy
Free Blog Hosting
|