Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 09:39:00 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 12:11:45, Sandro Necchi wrote:
>Hi,
>
>you are not fair as you did not read what has been written about what happened.
it is unimportant if the operator of jonny wanted to be FAIR or nice.
the GUI said 3rd repetition and the operator has to call the TD to
ask for a draw.
this is the rule.
It is in this case not important what the emotions of the operator want.
the operator is only a VOICE of the Screen that SHOWS information.
>What happened was allowed by the agreed (by all partecipants) rules.
ah i see.
if nobody stands up
then it is an agreement by all.
one day it is OK to throw out LIST because of the complain, because
of the rules or whatever, and the next day it is ok to make a win out of a draw.
and the next tournament the programs do not play a move and the operators
decided themselves before the game about the result ?
>Maybe we can improve the rules, but we MUST followed and accept them once we
>have accepted them. Both in the good or bad.
The rules are not the problem. The people using/misusing the rules are the
problem.
It's exactly about ACCEPTENCE !
When will the ICCA/ICGA accept their own rules ?
When will they stop to manipulate the championships with different kind
of judgement.
you can write tons of rules and laws, when the TD's don't follow them
or do whatever they want your rules are not worth anything.
>There is no more we can say on thim matter. I understand we may have different
>opinions, but the rules are the rules.
EXCATLY. here we agree.
if my GUI says Ng5 and the operator says: oh no - Ng5 is too tough, i better
play Ng1 that makes it easier for the opponent...
>Anything more on this matter may be just misleading.
>
>Does anyone really believe that we would have been allowed to win the game if
>this was against the rules?
>
>I hope to see people talk about the chess games as players and not caring about
>things which have very little to do with chess.
the things that have "very little to do with chess" are the human beeings
deciding.
we could eliminate the human beeings operating, and replace the
ICCA/ICGA with a better organisation.
>I am wondering if this is a chess site or something else...
this is a computerchess site. if you are looking for a chess site you are in the
wrong forum.
>I stated that we would have won the championship no matter anything and we did.
excatly. no matter the rules of the ICGA are followed or not :-))
>Think about how I could knew this from a chess point of view instead of making a
>lot of noise on nonsense things.
>
>Pls. speak about chess and chess games, engines etc...otherwise change sport.
>
>Sandro
Ah come on. When i present data that Mchess uses a killer book of melted
autoplayer games against hiarcs, you come with excuses and try to attack the
people who come with the data as doing "campaigns" and stuff like this.
And there you do not talk about chess either.
Now you want to talk about chess instead talking about what has happened.
You turn the INTEREST in the way you need it.
One day you are interested in chess, in the past you were politician that
was "defending" against "campaigns".
Neither the one thing nor the other thing is right.
Nobody starts a campaign. Nor has anything against YOU or your team, no matter
WHICH TEAM we talk about.
We talk about the things that have happened.
> [Event "60/60"]
> [Site "both k6/200 Mhz"]
> [Date "1997.12.25"]
> [Round "1"]
> [White "MCP7"]
> [Black "HIARCS6"]
> [Result "1-0"]
>
> 1.e4 Nf6 {H6: 01 1...Nf6 = 0}
> 2.e5 Nd5 {H6: 01 2...Nd5 = 0}
> 3.d4 d6 {H6: 01 3...d6 = 0}
> 4.c4 Nb6 {H6: 01 4...Nb6 = 0}
> 5.f4 dxe5 {H6: 01 5...dxe5 = 0}
> 6.fxe5 Nc6 {H6: 01 6...Nc6 = 0}
> 7.Be3 Bf5 {H6: 01 7...Bf5 = 0}
> 8.Nc3 e6 {H6: 01 8...e6 = 0}
> 9.Nf3 Qd7 {H6: 01 9...Qd7 = 0}
> 10.Be2 O-O-O {H6: 01 10...O-O-O = 0}
> 11.O-O Bg4 {H6: 01 11...Bg4 = 0}
> 12.c5 Nd5 {H6: 01 12...Nd5 = 0}
> 13.Nxd5 Qxd5 {H6: 01 13...Qxd5 = 0}
> 14.Ng5 Bxe2 {H6: 01 14...Bxe2 = 0}
> 15.Qxe2 Nxd4 {H6: 01 15...Nxd4 = 0}
> 16.Bxd4 Qxd4+ {H6: 01 16...Qxd4+ = 0}
> 17.Kh1 Qd2 {H6: 01 17...Qd2 = 0}
> 18.Qxd2 Rxd2 {H6: 01 18...Rxd2 = 0}
> 19.Rxf7 Bxc5 {H6: 01 19...Bxc5 = 0}
> 20.Nxe6 Bb6 {H6: 01 20...Bb6 = 0}
> 21.Nxg7 Bd4 {H6: 01 21...Bd4 = 0}
> 22.e6 Bxb2 {H6: 01 22...Bxb2 = 0}
> 23.Raf1 c5 {H6: 08 23...c5 e7 Bxg7 Rxg7 Re8 Rxh7 Kd7 Re1 Rxa2 Kg1 =
> -7}
> 24.h4 Re2 {H6: 09 24...Re2 e7 Bxg7 Rxg7 Re8 Rxh7 R8xe7 Rxe7 Rxe7 Rc1 b6
> g4 =
> -23}
> 25.Rb1 Be5 {H6: 09 25...Be5 Rfxb7 Rxa2 Nf5 Ra6 R7b5 Rxe6 Rxc5+ Kd8 Rxe5
> Rxe5
> Rb8+ Kc7 Rxh8 Rxf5 Rxh7+ Kb6 = -190}
> 26.Rfxb7 Rxa2 {H6: 09 26...Rxa2 e7 Ra4 g3 Rb4 e8=Q+ Rxe8 R7xb4 cxb4
> Nxe8 Kd8
> Rxb4 Kxe8 = -254}
> 27.Nf5 Ra6 {H6: 08 27...Ra6 R7b5 Ra1 Rxc5+ Kd8 Rxa1 = -428}
> 28.R7b5 Rc6 {H6: 09 28...Rc6 Ne7+ Kc7 Rb7+ Kd6 Rd1+ Bd4 Nxc6 Kxc6 Rxa7
> Re8
> e7 h5 Rc1 = -428}
> 29.Ne7+ Kc7 {H6: 09 29...Kc7 Ra5 Re8 Rxa7+ Kd6 Rbb7 Rxe7 Rxe7 Bf6 Rxh7
> Kxe6
> g4 = -431}
> 30.Rb7+ Kd6 {H6: 10 30...Kd6 Rd1+ Bd4 Nxc6 Kxc6 Rxa7 h5 Ra6+ Kd5 Rf1 c4
> e7
> Re8 Ra5 = -415}
> 31.Nxc6 Kxc6 {H6: 10 31...Kxc6 Rxa7 = -412}
> 32.Rxa7 Re8 {H6: 10 32...Re8 Rxh7 Rxe6 Ra7 Kd5 g4 Rg6 Rd1+ Bd4 g5 =
> -414}
> 33.Rxh7 Rxe6 {H6: 10 33...Rxe6 g4 c4 Kg2 c3 Kf3 Bd6 Rc1 Rf6+ Ke2 Be5 =
> -437}
> 34.g4 c4 {H6: 09 34...c4 g5 = -451}
> 35.Kg2 c3 {H6: 09 35...c3 Ra7 Kd5 h5 Re8 Rd1+ Ke6 Ra6+ Ke7 g5 Rf8 Rc6 =
> -490}
> 36.Kf3 Rf6+ {H6: 09 36...Rf6+ Ke4 Bg3 Kd3 Rf3+ Kc2 Be5 g5 Rf2+ Kd3 =
> -477}
> 37.Ke2 Rd6 {H6: 09 37...Rd6 Rd1 Rg6 Kf3 Rf6+ Ke4 Bf4 Kd3 Rg6 g5 Be5 =
> -478}
> 38.Rd1 Rg6 {H6: 09 38...Rg6 g5 = -489}
> *
>
> Mchess computed in the 38th move for the first time !
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.