Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:19:06 12/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2003 at 00:11:47, Terry McCracken wrote: >On December 09, 2003 at 23:26:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 09, 2003 at 23:20:15, Terry McCracken wrote: >> >>>On December 09, 2003 at 22:38:45, Nicholas Cooper wrote: >>> >>>>On December 09, 2003 at 14:26:47, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 09, 2003 at 10:59:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>"An operator can only (1) type in moves and (2) respond to request from >>>>>>the compute for clock information." >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>How, from that rule, does it become possible for the operator to say "Hmm. >>>>>>the engine claims a draw, >>>>> >>>>>The engine didn't claim a draw. >>>>> >>>>>Unless you consider the interface part of the engine, but that's IMHO >>>>>another discussion. If the Jonny engine would have claimed the draw >>>>>I would agree with you but given the facts I consider the ICGA decision >>>>>also acceptable. >>>>> >>>>>-- >>>>>GCP >>>> >>>>This whole interface/engine discussion seems ridiculous to me... >>>> >>>>If applied to humans, are we to say that the brain and body are the interface >>>>and engine respectively and that, according to the proposed (IMHO illogical) >>>>division, a human can't claim a draw by three-fold repetition using one's mouth >>>>or hands, as these are part of the interface!!?? >>>> >>>>All I can see if a whole lot of illogical defences of a poor decision by the TD. >>> >>>FYI "Spock" the TD didn't know what was happening during the game, he didn't >>>understand the question posed to him and consequently we have this non ending >>>chase your tail type arguements. What would you have done, after the fact if you >>>had to make a ruling with your peers? >>> >>>I think I know what you or any sensible person would have done. Nothing would >>>change, Shredder would still be declared the WCCC. >> >>This came up _during_ the game, _after_ the game, and could have been >>handled correctly. The right thing to do when you screw up is to say "I >>screwed up, the game should have been declared a draw, therefore Fritz >>is the winner and there will be no playoff." If the TD couldn't figure >>that out before the playoff was over, he should _still_ have said "I >>made a mistake, Fritz is the winner, the playoff is therefore negated." >> >>The event and title are too important to let an incompetent TD decision >>influence the final result. Mistakes were made. But the _biggest_ mistake >>was letting the original mistake go uncorrected, then making lame and >>ridiculous excuses about why the original (flawed) decision was really OK >>if you look at it like "this"... > >You may find this shocking, but it isn't as important as you claim. > >The universe will keep unfolding, even when mankind is dust! I can only speak for myself. Every event I played in was important to the participants. We _always_ wanted the _right_ result. Not some human-interfered, TD- screwed-up result..
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.