Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:07:53 06/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 10, 2000 at 18:43:57, blass uri wrote: >On June 10, 2000 at 08:28:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: > > >> >>You know very well why you were censored. You made the direct claim, here in >>CCC, that I specifically wrote crafty so that if it was getting mated, it would >>sit and run out of time rather than letting the opponent mate me. > >The cases discussed was about losing on time in a drawn position. >I remember that Amir admitted that he did a bad job in explaining himself. > >He meant to criticize crafty's behaviour against computers and meant to >criticize the fact that you did not look for the game to see the reason for the >fact that crafty lost on time in the position that it has nothing to lose from >it but he did not mean to say the direct claim that you and some other people >understood. > >Uri all he had to do was post a one line explanation... I don't remember losing on time in a drawn position. I don't see how that would be considered "abusive". It would be considered "stupid". not moving when getting mated could be considered abusive, but losing a drawn game by not moving seems to be a long way from that...
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.