Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:47:36 11/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 30, 2003 at 19:05:56, Terry McCracken wrote: >On November 30, 2003 at 12:45:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 30, 2003 at 11:50:12, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >> >>>I wonder what would have happened, if not Shredder was the one in favor of >>>yesterday's break of rules, but e.g. List. In that case, the result of the game >>>would have been overturned into the draw it really was. >>> >>>But ... when it comes to rules and when to cling to them, it's always a matter >>>of understanding ... the dutch TD Hering did not really understand Johnny's >>>operator's question ... maybe they should provide hearing aids next time ... The >>>ICGA reminds me of the IOC ... incompetence and bias all the way. >>> >>>And: If not Fritz but Diep or Sjeng were to be denied the title of world >>>champion in that way, there would be lots of protests against the decision to >>>overrule Johnny's draw reclamation. But CB obviously did not mind, since >>>Shredder and Fritz are both CB horses. >>> >>>That's sad. Shredder is NOT the legitimate champion. This tourney result is just >>>a big joke. >>> >>>Andreas >> >> >>Did Shredder win the playoff? If so this is about the most ridiculous WCCC >>final result I have ever heard of. >> >>By the way, calling this set of people/circumstances "incompetent" really >>is an insult to all the really incompetent people around the world... I would >>certainly be embarassed to claim the title "2003 WCCC champion" myself.. Had >>I won it under these circumstances.. > >I can't believe you're saying this Robert, and I don't concur with your >assessment. > >What would you have the ICGA do? > >The draw can't be ligitimized, by the FIDE rules, so why here? Jonny should have >resigned much earlier and stopped this embarrassing situation from taking place. > >Terry What in the name of heaven are you talking about? The program claimed a draw and told the operator what move it would make to repeat the position. The computer is playing using blind chess rules, which means it has a human proxy that relays its moves to the board. The rules _clearly_ say that if the human makes a mistake, the game backs up to that point (of the mistake) and resumes from that point. The point in that is obvious. This is a match between two computer programs, communicating in the most stupid way possible because the ICCA simply refuses to do as we have done in the CCT event and use automatic interfaces to eliminate humans. The human _must_ do what the computer says do. This operator chose to not do that. The game was a draw. There is no other conclusion that can be reached according to the rules we have been using for computer chess tournaments for 34 years... So your logic simply escapes me. You are mixing FIDE rules with computer chess events. The two are not related. Computers can't make moves, call over a TD, hit the clock, write the moves down, etc. So the rules were specifically formulated to address that "difference". Except that the TD for this event seems to have forgotten about it...
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.