Author: Shep
Date: 01:31:03 08/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 18, 1999 at 14:15:59, James T. Walker wrote: >Hello Shep, >I guess I'm not very sensible for wanting the program to play by the rules of >chess which includes playing by the clock. It's beyond my comprehension why you >would play a rated game in a tournament under time control conditions and not >think playing according to the clock is important. That reminds me of a guy I >used to play golf with. He didn't think the rules of golf were important or >applied to him. I like CST-2 but it has some problems which need attention. >This one happens to be my pet peeve. The clock gives both players a fair >allotment of time which should be followed. If you fail to play the given >number of moves in the alloted time you lose! Other than that it's not >important. >Jim Walker It's a matter of philosophy. I am not a slave to the rulebook, besides my SCCS tournament rules don't even mention this issue. :) I want to test playing strength. If one program steps over the time control by 13 seconds (which is about 1/550th of the alotted overall time), it does not matter much and does not constitute any unfair advantage over its opponent. It is also a matter of etiquette. I wouldn't claim a victory in a tournament because my opponent took 13 seconds too long on his 40th move. If he took 5 minutes, that would be another issue, but this way it is just as unsportsmanlike to claim a victory as it is to overstep the controls. (Actually, I even hate people with "Autoflag=on" on ICC... ;-)) --- Shep
This page took 0.03 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.