Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:19:56 05/16/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 16, 2000 at 21:53:58, Hans Gerber wrote: >On May 16, 2000 at 21:34:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On May 16, 2000 at 19:31:15, Hans Gerber wrote: >> >>>On May 16, 2000 at 19:04:16, Charles Milton Ling wrote: >>> >>>>It seems apparent to me that the only way to resolve the problem this game >>>>seemingly posed is that computers (or their operators) NEVER offer draws. Have >>>>fun, humans. (And you won't even be able to protest anymore.) >>>> >>> >>>I think the rules already say that. F. Morsch should not have offered a draw. >>>But the computer could have been programmed for such draws. Then the draw could >>>be offered. But not in a position with -2. This would be improper behavior >>>anyway. Exception technical draws. >> >> >>The rules don't say when you may offer a draw. They only say that you can't >>repeatedly offer a draw to intentionally distract/confuse your opponent. The >>offer from Frans was perfectly legitimate and appropriate, as otherwise the >>opponent would have lost on time, period. > >Would you agree that his behavior was wrong if I could prove that Tiviakov could >never lose the game? Again, would you rethink the case if you knew that Tiviakov >could not lose following the rules? Please give me a quick answer so that I can >explain the rest to you. > If, if, if... If a frog had pockets, he would carry a gun and never worry about snakes in the pond... Tiviakov _could_ lose that game. If he had just sat on his butt for one more minute, he would have lost. Absolutely. Because his flag would have fallen, and his opponent still had sufficient material to mate him. So no, his behavior wasn't wrong. He was all that stood between a flagged loss after another minute elapsed, and a draw that the GM didn't deserve. He made the offer as a gentleman, in a show of sportsmanship. The GM acted like yet another ____. (you fill in the blank, you know what _I_ would put there)... > >> >>Frans went way beyond what was called for, and should be applauded for trying >>to do the right thing, not villified for absolutely insipid reasons... > > >As I said, please answer my question and you will see how wrong the behavior >was. Promised. I answered. Please show me how it was wrong. > >(BTW did you find data about the press conference after the second game?) I am not looking. It is a moot point to me.
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.