Author: Enrique Irazoqui
Date: 09:33:26 05/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 19, 2000 at 12:27:41, Ed Schröder wrote: >On May 19, 2000 at 12:13:44, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On May 19, 2000 at 12:04:05, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>The only loss due to HW was the Reb-Cen Hoffman. >>> >>>How do I justify removing games for Shredder and >>>Junior due to operator error and IP failure (which >>>I think should be removed from the TPR, but listed >>>in the results) but not the HW failure for Rebel? >>>It may be a won position for Hoffman, it was right >>>to declare him the winner with prize money, but having >>>a won position and winning are two different things. >>>I think this game should be left out of the TPR >>>calculation. Just 2 cents. :) >> >>I always counted it because Rebel was indeed lost. Ed agrees, by the way. But >>since you have a different opinion, why don't you make 2 lists, one with ant the >>other without this game? > >2 points... a) I think Rebel would have lost the Hoffman game by good >play of Hoffman but how can you be sure of that? That's Uri's point. I am personally sure enough, but even in case of uncertainty the game should count, or else no games played on the Kyro thing should count. I mean, if we count points scored by Rebel on that particular overclocked (faster) machine, we should also count the games lost because of failure due to overclocking. Enrique > and b) the hardware >collapsed, better show up with good hardware. The machine had a flu so >can humans have, so always count the game in case of hardware failures. > >Ed > >>Enrique >> >>>Best Regards, >>>Chris Carson
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.